Napier Commission in the Outer Hebrides

Introduction

2010-08-02T20:30:00.002+01:00

On this blog have been posted transcripts of the findings of the Napier Commission. More formally, this is known as The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Condition of Crofters and Cottars in the Highlands and Islands.

UHI (University of the Highlands and Islands) Millennium Institute, at its campus at Lochaber College, Mallaig, has digitised the thousands of pages of the report and made it available on their website, from where the below background information was copied.

The commission was set up as a response to crofter and cottar demonstrations against excessively high rents, lack of security of tenure on land that had been in families for generations and the forced evictions of crofters.

The demonstrations started in Wester Ross and Lewis in the 1870's, and by the early 1880's had moved to Skye. Local police forces were called upon by the landlords to enforce what they believed to be their rights. However, with limited resources, the police found it difficult to cope with the increasing demands put upon them. Therefore, it became an issue needing the attention of Prime Minister Gladstone’s government and he ordered the appointment of the commission.

Under the orders of William Gladstone, and backed by Royal approval, the commission was appointed in 1883, by the Home Secretary, Sir William Harcourt. Francis Napier, 10th Lord Napier, was selected as chairman, with five other members - Sir Donald Cameron of Locheil; Sir Kenneth MacKenzie of Gairloch; Charles Fraser – MacIntosh MP; Sheriff Alexander Nicolson of Kicudbright and Professor Donald MacKinnon of Edinburgh university – making up the panel.

The commission began its work in Braes on the Island of Skye and travelled the length and breadth of the Highlands and Islands (including Orkney and Shetland) gathering evidence from crofters, landlords and others who were familiar with the plight of the indigenous population.

The final report was hastily published in 1884 and led obliquely to the 1886 Crofters’ Holding Act.

The Napier’s Report is a valuable piece of documentary evidence from the Highlands and Islands (including Orkney and Shetland) in 1883, presenting facts and information on the population, as well as the political, historical and social climate of the time.

The text was copied from the PDFs, supplied by UHI Lochaber, and pasted into a word processor for cleaning up and correction, where necessary. In case of doubt, the original text was consulted. Spelling errors in local names have not been corrected. The text of the original report has been broken up into locations (listed in the panel to the right).

Appendices have been added, where applicable to the Western Isles (no's A.XXV to A.XLV); the headings omit the letter A.

Appendices

2010-08-02T17:59:00.003+01:00

Appendices 25 to 31 relate to the grievances of the Catholics in Barra and South Uist that their children are educated by non-Catholic teachers.

XXV - Statement by Rev Archibald Macdonald, Barra
XXVI - Statement by Rev James Chisholm, Barra
XXVII - Statement by Right Rev Angus Macdonald, Bishop of Argyll & the Isles, Oban
XXVIII - Statement by Rev Roderick Macdonald, South Uist
XXIX - Statement by Rev Alexander Macintosh, Dalibrog
XXX - Statement by Rev Alexander Campbell, Bornish
XXXI - Statement by Rev Donald Macintosh, Benbecula

XXXII - Letters home by emigrants from Benbecula

XXXIII - Statement by Rev John A. Macrae, North Uist
XXXIV - Statement by Rev Angus Maciver, Uig (Lewis)
XXXV - Statement by Rev Angus Macritchie, Knock (Point)
XXXVI - Statement by Rev Roderick Macrae, Carloway
XXXVII - Statement by Rev James Strachan, Barvas
XXXVIII - Statement by Rev James Strachan, Barvas (on sheriff Macdonald)
XXXIX - Statement on behalf of Lady Matheson of the Lews
XL - Report by John Duthie on fisheries to J. Munro Mackenzie
XLI - Statement by William Mackay, chamberlain to the Lews Estate (includes letters from emigrants)
XLII - Statement by Sheriff William Black, sheriff depute (re fishery)
XLIII - Statement by Rev J. Martin, Stornoway
XLIV - Statement by Napier Campbell, solicitor
XLV - Statement by Rev Ewan Campbell, Lochs
XLVI - Statement by John Scobie, former factor of the Lews
XLVII - Statement by Roderick Campbell, North Dell
XLVIII - Statement by Alexander Carmichael

Appendix XLVIII

2010-08-02T17:54:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by Mr ALEXANDER CARMICHAEL as to Farming Customs in the Outer Hebrides.

November 1883.
1. Township.—The English word township represents the Gaelic word ' baile,' as applied to a rural locality and to a country community. I prefer the word townland to township, having already used it in the paper which Mr Skene asked me to write for his Celtic Scotland, and which your Lordship was pleased to commend. The word commune has unpleasant associations, but being descriptive of the social economy of the Highlands, I shall use it here. The earliest mention which occurs to me of the word townland, is in Martin's Western Isles, published in 1703. This is the book which Dr Johnson says gave him a desire to see the Highlands of Scotland, and to which the world is indebted for Johnson's famous Tour to the Hebrides. I think the word townland is recognised by law. I have seen it used in law documents. The townland has a collective existence in various ways—by tradition, by usage, by the conditions of the people, and by the treatment of the proprietor. I shall endeavour to show this, and in doing so shall confine my illustrations to the Long Island. All the crofter land in the Outer Hebrides is either wholly or in part held in common by the crofters of each commune. There are three modes of holding the land by the crofters. In some townships no part of the land is permanently held by an individual crofter. In this case, a third of the arable land is triennally allotted ; in another, part of the arable land is permanently held, and the rest periodically allotted; while, in the third case, all the arable land is held unchangeably, the grazing ground alone being held in common. All the crofters throughout the Long Island graze their horse, sheep, and cattle in common, each townland being, however, confined to its own special grazings.

2. The Townland Constable —The crofters of each commune are presided over by one of themselves. This officer is called by the people the townland constable—Gaelic, constabal baile. In some townlands the crofters alone elect the farm constable ; in some they elect him in conjunction with the proprietor ; in others the proprietor alone appoints him ; while not infrequently, people and proprietor have each a constable to represent them in the townland. The crofters complain that when the proprietor, or rather the factor, ignores them in the appointment of a farm constable, the man thus appointed and paid by the factor is, unconsciously to himself no doubt, altogether too compliant to the factor, too often to their loss. Hence the people elect a man to look after their own interest, when the factor alone appoints the constable. When a constable is elected, the crofters confer among themselves as to the man most suitable for the once. They meet, and this and all kindred meetings are all called nabac, ' neighbourliness.' If the crofters meet during the day they probably meet at Cnoc Na Comhairle, the Council Hill, or at Clach Na Comhairle, the Council Stone. If they meet at night it is in some central house in the farm. Invariably these meetings are held at night to avoid losing time during the day. To me these meetings of the crofters were highly interesting, as
showing the ability of the people, their logical and legal acumen, their readiness of resource, and, I am happy to add, their invariable courtesy towards one another. In seeing these respectable industrious crofters quietly, friendly, and judiciously thus arranging their farming affairs, often wet, weary, and hungry, without food, without rest, without having been home since early morning when they left for their work, I have felt that they are cruelly maligned.
When a crofter is elected constable of his townland, he takes off his shoes and stockings, and taking his bonnet in his hand, and bowing low and reverently, he declares on honour, in presence of earth and heaven, in presence of God and men — Am fianuis uir agus adhair, am nanuis Dia agus daoine —that he shall be faithful to his trust. When the man stands with his bare feet on the ground, it indicates that his body is in contact with the earth of which he is made, and to which he returns. To emphasise this, he sometimes in bowing takes up a handful of earth and places it on his head. This simple declaration of office is extremely impressive, though now, alas, becoming obsolete from the fears of the shallow thoughtless, and the scoffs of the severely wise. Utilitarians say that 'the progress of civilisation is dying away with the ' rude ignorant ways of the people.' It may be so. But the so-called 'rude ignorant ways of the people' were infinitely more manly and natural than many of the shoddy artificial ways by which they are being supplanted. In some townlands the constable is elected or re-elected yearly ; in some he is elected for a term of years, and in others he is elected for life. The practice varies in the various townlands, but the principle is the same throughout. The services of the constable appointed by the factor are paid in money; those of the constable elected by the people are paid in kind. To compensate the constable for his time in looking after their affairs, the crofters of his townland give him grazing and tillage—Gaelic, fiar agus aiteach. The duties of the constable are varied, delicate, sometimes troublesome, and require shrewdness, firmness, and judgment. The constable, however, is always assisted by his fellow-crofters, sometimes by the whole of them, as occasion may require.

staill, poill) of the farm having become exhausted, the factor or his ground officer points out a new peat moss for the people. The constable divides this new peat moss into the necessary number of shares, or pennies'—Gaelic, peighinnean—lots are cast for these stances, and every crofter takes the stance which has fallen to him. Lest a man should be placed at any advantage or disadvantage from his neighbours, these banks are again subjected to the lot (Gaelic, crann), in the course of three, five, seven, or nine years, as the people may determine.

A peat road—Gaelic, utraid moine—has to be made to this new peat ground. Probably the road has to be made over some miles of rock, bog, and moorland. It is the duty of the constable to see that every crofter in the townland gives his necessary share of free labour to make this road He must see also that all the bye-roads on the farm are kept in repair by the mutual co-operation of the people, and that where the roads are on a soft foundation, that no traffic is carried over them during or immediately after wet weather. To ensure equal distribution of labour, these bye-roads are divided into ' pennies.' The good and bad, the soft and hard, the steep and level portions of the road are thus divided, and each crofter has to repair his own share. The constable engages the herds and shepherd of the farm, apportions their land, and collects their wages from his fellow crofters according to their rent. He sees that the souming of the townland is Lu conformity with the rules of the place, and that no man has a greater aggregate stock than his holding allows, according as he has a whole croft, a half croft, or a quarter croft Every townland has a cattle fold on the machair and another on the gearry. The machair is the irregularly broad plain of sandy soil on the edge of the Atlantic, and the gearry is the irregularly wide grazing ground between the machair and the moor, and which has been wrested from the bog and heathery waste by the hard splendid labours of the crofters. In wet weather the constable instructs the herd to keep the cattle on the machair, where the fold (Gaelic, cuthebuaile), from the nature of the soil, is less wet and comfortless for the cows and the women who milk them than the fold on the gearry. The constable must see that the dyke round the fold is repaired in early summer before being used, and that the gate, so to speak—Gaelic, cliath na cadha or cadha-chliath—is good. This term, cliath na cadha, literally the wattle of the gorge or pass, is curious. In wooded districts throughout the Highlands, where materials can be found, doors, gates, partitions, fences, and barns, and in some places dwelling-houses, are still made of wattling. Of old this wattle work was used largely by the Celts. It is believed that many of their early houses and churches were so made ; and those best qualified to judge, notably Mr Skene, believe that Saint Columba's first church in Iona was constructed of wattles. The old name of Dublin—Gaelic, Dubh-linne, literally ' black pool'—was and is Bail-ath-cliath, the town of the ford of wattles, from the first bridge over the river Lifey having been made of wattle work. Probably the interlacing so much used and so much admired in ancient Celtic sculpturing had its origin in this wattle work, occasionally called basket work.
An important part of the duties of the farm-constable is to measure and divide the arable land previous to lots being cast for the shares. In doing this the measures the land across and at the boundary of each share—Gaelic, earann — he cuts an incision in the ground, such like the broad arrow of the Ordnance Department. This incision—Gaelic, beum—is called by the curious name of ' tore' being the Gaelic name for a boar. In reclaiming moorland the people cultivate the ground in long narrow strips, with deep drains between. This is an admirable way of reclaiming land, and the crops produced by these narrow strips, incorrectly named lazybeds, are better than those produced by any other mode of tillage. The frequent drains dry the moss, very often morass, while the sun has access to the seed, not only at the top but also at both sides of the ridge. Should the crofters of a townland have occasion to complain to the factor of a fellow crofter, a deputation from the crofters go to the factor to prefer the complaint. This deputation is represented by the constable alone or in company. The factor confers with the constable, gives instructions, and possibly removes the refractory crofter from his croft should he continue to offend against the customs of the commune. The constable delivers information from the factor to the people as to the day on which the factor is to collect rents and rates, as to new rules which the factor is to enforce, or old ones that he wishes more strictly observed, and so forth.

In the past the farm-constable had often to help the ground-officer—Gaelic maor—to carry out directions under the factor. In this he had sometimes to help evicting the people, in pulling down the houses of near relations, even those of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters. The constable sees to cuartachadh a bhaile, which may be described as rounding or circuiting the crops of the townland. There are no fences, and when the crops grow up two men of the townland perambulate the farm all night, lest any of their own horses or cattle, or those of neighbouring farms, should break loose and destroy the com. Each two crofters in the townland take this watching in rotation. Should the watchers be remiss, and damage— Gaelic, miaatadh domail—to result, the two crofters responsible have to make good the loss. The constable appraizes the injury and exacts the money; and in this the people are very exacting. As they say—' Is e an cuntas goirid a ni an cairdeas fada'—It is the short accounting that leaves the friendship long.
Those, however, who are thus exacting in pecuniary matters are nevertheless most considerate towards one another in other things. Should a crofter or his family be laid up with illness his fellow crofters help on his work. This neighbourly help is, I regret to say, becoming less as the progress of civilisation' among the people is advancing. In connection with this watching, the people speak of a time when they had to kindle fires to scare away wild beasts from their flocks, as they have to do still to scare away deer and wild geese from their crops. In some places in the Long Island the people have to sit up all night to watch their com from the deer. I asked the crofters if ever they mentioned this hardship to the factor. Yes, we have mentioned it to him, and he told us that if we ever mentioned it to him again he would clear us all out to be out of the way of the deer. We therefore keep quiet, but suffer.
In some places the grey-lags (gtas-gheoidh) come down in such thick flocks in autumn as to wholly destroy the field on which they alight. The people are not allowed to shoot them, nor to Are at them, nor even to keep a gun to scare them away, so they resort in their watching to kindle fires. These fires look picturesque at night, and remind one of Campbell's beautiful poem of The Soldier's Dream'—
' By the wolf-scaring faggot that guarded the slain'
The farm-constable buys fresh stock for his townland and sells the old. He will not allow a crofter to cart seaweed from the shore till his neighbours have reasonable time to be there, nor will he allow a crofter to cut seaweed when and where he likes. He must see that the run-rig land—Gaelic, rinn-ruithimire—
of one man is not allowed to he under water to the injury of the man to whose lot it may fall at next allotting.

ALEXANDER CARMICHAEL

Appendix XLVII

2010-08-02T17:53:00.001+01:00

STATEMENT of Mr RODERICK CAMPBELL
NORTH DELL, NESS, LEWIS,
17th September 1883.

As a preliminary illustration, I shall endeavour to show the course that should, in my opinion, be adopted in order to redress the grievances now under investigation in the Highlands and Islands. There is scarcely anything certain in the pilgrimage of life but two, viz., mortality and taxation. Now 'taxation' without representation, as every honest man will allow, is hardly, if anything, short of tyranny. After a careful study of this theme, I find that no fewer, or considerably over 3000 crofters are paying taxes in the Lewis alone, to one, we suppose, of the most enlightened and generous of Governments in existence, thus without ever having a representation, the result being that, in almost all cases (though naturally intelligent), they seem to belong to the far off ages of the past than living in the enlightened and fast nineteenth century, quite incapable of expressing themselves in public to advocate their just rights as adult males and honest householders in the human race. Why has England termed herself ' the asylum of the oppressed' if she has extended enfranchisement to her colonies at large, and kept this noble liberty from this class of her most loyal people at home ? Deprived of this ' liberty' has also deprived them of certain amount of moral courage. For instance, at the time of the annexation with Canada of Hudson Bay territory, in 1870, 1871, and 1872 inclusive, it was my chance to be present at many of the treaties so successfully made between the Canadian Commissioners (empowered by a British prerogative) and the several Indian chiefs ; and I can vouch that those ' chiefs' (with their men), almost stark naked, and besmeared throughout with their native clay, 'tac-kee (our ground), spoke out before those ' Commissioners' for over two hours on a stretch, and thus without fear, or even affectation in their elocution—totally uneducated ; and drawing a line of comparison, I will, without difficulty, arrive at this—the one had a native liberty, the other deprived of that ' liberty'. In the fervent view of the Scottish Local Government Board Bill being passed next session of our Parliament, and in conformity with the real want of the Highlands and Islands, on the wide basis of administrative decentralisation it would do an incalculable amount of improvement in rural districts to extend the local franchise to every householder who pays for that noble liberty that has made other countries to prosper in unity and civilisation; it would also conduce to break the omnipotent cord the estate factors in those places have held so long, t.e., great dread, and every public office surrounding them, except that of the parish minister. To proceed, I strongly advocate spontaneous—families and whole villages (not individual)— emigration to the colonies, with a chosen energetic young man as spiritual adviser. Canada being the nearest to Britain, and, above all others, has made the most generous efforts of inducement to all those who would come, to share their profits and losses together, and to fill up her ' second to none' illimitable prairies with her own people. I can conscientiously assert, after an experience of twenty years in the Canadian north-west, knowing the country thoroughly in its genesis and in its growth, that I venture to vouch any overture that may be made by the British Government in this direction, to be one of the best and healthiest climates in the world for Highland people. The part of the Canadian north-west to which I should direct attention is in the same latitude as Penzance, England, and its summer mean temperature, as being wonderfully uniform, tells its own story, and may here be inserted as a guarantee for those who wish to look the subject up :—

Fort M'Leod, 49°41'N 113° 33'W
June 59° 20"
July 64" 43'
August 63° 30'
Mean of summer months: 59° 30'

Penzance, 50° 8'N
June 59° 3'
July 62° 2'
August 61° 2'
Mean of summer months: 60° 9'

There is a westerly current named the ' Chinooks ' which crosses the Rocky Mountains in the lower parts from the Pacific, and passes over the eastern plateau, which acts on this part in a manner similar to the action of the Gulf Stream on the British Isles—the which I have seen to raise the temperature in half a day to 50". Consequently cattle and horses are enabled to live in the open all winter, the grasses being very nutritious. There is no getting over this evidence of facts. Why, the fact of the presence of vast herds of wild cattle from the beginning on those plains at so high a latitude may serve as ample proof of the climatology and productive capacity of this region, which contains at least between 400,000 and 500,000 square miles ; and as I have a personal knowledge of this tract, I maintain it has a capacity to support at least twenty-five millions of inhabitants. The soil is also of an excellent quality, and not easily exhausted, black loam resting on clay sub-soil; and in the valleys vegetable loam resting on the alluvial drifts of the rivers, and is extremely rich—so rich that the cereals grow with a strength, luxuriance, and profusion of yield which are the wonder of the new comers. As it has always been a British maxim to receive well-founded grievances, I fain hope that this portion of my statement will graciously receive all due attention and consideration it deserves, and that liberal means will be provided to serve the common interest, to establish a lasting change, by giving a free passage, one year or six months' provisions, some farming implements, a few competent men for one year to show them best how to get on in their new sphere ; and placing them so in contiguous sections, I have no fear of their future welfare in this magnificent portion of Her Majesty's dominion. And I would further ask here, why not provide this remedy for the grievances and misery that have been reported this year in the Highlands and Islands, when we behold Britain daily receiving unto her bosom other nationalities ? For instance, there arrived in Manitoba nine years ago a colony of 7000 or 8000 Mennonites from southern Russia ; those received a tract of land forty miles of a stretch, and the ' Goshen' of Manitoba to boot; there they did dwell, and these are to-day, without a doubt, better off than many German princes. In the event that this project do not work satisfactorily, and this class remain as they are, I have no fear of predicting that matters will work before many years in the direction of a social volcano.

I shall now add a few remarks in reference to the Lewis. Supposing its resources were exhausted, I maintain that there is land presently held by tacksmen, arable, and convenient, to fishing grounds, that should reasonably be given crfoter fishermen. To substantiate this, I was incidentally informed by one of these men, who said, that while North Galson was held by them that he with other boats used to land annually from 3000 to 4000 ling. This port is now vacant, and like it every farm that has been built in the island has been more or less the downfall of the poor man ; and thus because those 'farms' embrace certainly the ' Goshen' of it. Secondly, there is much useless land in the outskirts of the arable in its present condition, but having good subsoil, and easily reclaimable—the bringing in of which the present small holdings might be enlarged, and, indeed, in some localities where the moss has been extensively cleared off, new crofts might be laid out. In connection with this I should point out the necessity of better husbandry in the shape of draining, fencing, rotation of cropping; also grass-sown pastures, well protected for the use of the crofter or crofters reclaiming the same, with a lease of nineteen years, and a full compensation understood. Thirdly, the shape of the dwellings (as all people will allow) needing much improvement also. Fourthly, the promotion of the fisheries by harbours of refuge along the west coast, very much required to better the condition ; likewise & readier access of fresh fish to market by a tramway from the west coast to Stornoway would also be a vast improvement in the circumstances) together with telegraphic communication And lastly, the improving of our educational condition, recommending that, in the present overtaxed condition of the people, should be free to the poor, or at least that aid should be given in the supply of boots and clothing, & c , to the most destitute, would not only prove merciful, but highly honourable in those high latitudes (58° 31'). There seems also a lamentable failure in the schools, and children seem to be kept at school wasting their time, and not taught as they ought to be, especially when the age is increasing at which compulsory attendance was enforced in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland ; having said so, I am rather inclined to blame the system than the teachers; and thus because, in the rural districts, many bright and intelligent children are unquestionably born of poor parents, who are, we must allow, quite unable to send these to higher city schools, so that at the higher standards must both the 'bright' child and teacher remain together—the one quite ready to take a leap in the more light, the other dare not advance another step.

The above sentiments are written entirely and wholly without any prejudicial motive whatever, as I hold no propsrty in Britain—the radical principle being also foreign to my nature, but I fain hope I may safely use the terms of the ancient formula, that' right shall be done in all cases.'

Reviewing the foregoing considerations, I am satisfied that the efforts of the Royal Commission—who will have to perform impossibilities to meet exaggerated expectations—will conduce to a favourable issue in bringing to light many drawbacks hitherto unknown ; and that the Government in turn devote every energy to the promotion of new Acts in Parliament in the full assurance that efforts cannot fail to produce the happiness and welfare of this poor but loyal class in question.

RODERICK CAMPBELL.

Appendix XLVI

2010-08-02T17:52:00.001+01:00

STATEMENT by JOHN SCOBIE, late Factor for the Lewis.

KEOLDALE, DURNESS, SUTHERLAND, December 1883

Seeing the misstatements emitted before the Commission in evidence given in the Island of Lewis, I deem it but right to submit a few remarks on the facts of the case in justice to the late Sir James Matheson, and myself as factor at the time referred to.

I may mention that when Sir James bought the Lews there were arrears of £1417, 18s. Id. due by the crofters to the Seaforth management, which he paiDr ather than disturb his tenants, no part of which was recovered by him, owing to the severe years that followed. A considerable part of the said arrear was due by the tenants of Reef, Valtos, and Kneep, on the south side of Loch Roag, which may have induced the said management to set these townships, the year previous to the purchase, on 15 years' lease to a Dr Macaulay, along with the adjoining farm of Ardroil, formerly possessed by him. This being brought before Sir James as a hardship on the part of the crofters to be evicted, anDr epresented to the Hon. Mrs Stewart Mackenzie of Seaforth, she handsomely came forward and arranged with Dr Macaulay to renounce said lease, for which he was paid upwards of £4000, to which Sir James, on the score of goodwill, contributed £500, and besides took over the 8tock of Ardroil from Dr Macaulay at a cost of £933, 4s. 10d., in the hope of improving the condition of these crofters. Not long after, the Reef tenants complained of being far from their hill pasture and peats (being about 8 miles by water), saying they would be glad of any holdings where these would be convenient. The arable land at Reef was light sandy soil, and from constant tillage apt to be blown away by every gale, being much exposed to the full force of the Atlantic, from which cause their fishing was anything but prosperous. Neil M'Lennan, Breasclete, parish of Uig, stated before the Commission:

' The tenants of Reef got notice of removal from Mr Scobie, factor, and as they had no arrears of rent they refused to remove, and stood out against it for three years; and after his term of office expired, the new factor followed up what his predecessor had begun, and at last got them forcibly ejected.'

The facts are that there was no attempt at clearances during my five years of office except at Reef, in the hope of their doing better. They did not attend the works going on in the island as they should have done. Latterly there was a road made beside them at Glen Valtos, and a lake drained at Kneep, each work more with the view of giving them employment than any hope of remunerative benefit. At Whitsunday 1848 the Reef tenants were £141, 17s. 9d. in arrears, their yearly rent being £89, 14s. They were summoned, but were not removed till 1850, by my successor as factor, Mr J. Munro Mackenzie, They were then £231, 8s. 6d. in arrears of rent, besides a large sum for meal and seed given them. These tenants were then removed to crofts vacated by such as took advantage of free emigration, or to land not otherwise occupied, and were not crowded into other townships. On the west coast of the island, from Loch Roag to the Butt of Lewis, there are no boat harbours available for fishing, and the ground swell of the Atlantic lashing along that seaboard makes it hazardous to go to sea, even with the weather. The soil generally is less capable of improvement south of Galston, so that the people are still very far back comparatively. On the coast of the island there is comparative shelter and places of safety to run to, and the Ashing is prosecuted with energy. Sir James laid out largely in making new storehouses and curing places at the fishing-stations of Carloway, on the west coast, and on the east at Port of Ness, Skegirsta, Tolsta, Bayble, Portnaguiran, Holm, and Cromore, which outlay was a great success, the improvement of quality in the cure realizing more money in the home and foreign markets, giving a new impetus to the fisheries, which increased greatly beyond any idea formed of this industry.'

Add to this steam communication which had not extended previously north of Skye till Sir James opened weekly steam services to the Lews direct from the south, which brought about a ready-money system, doing away with the truck system which formerly existed less or more, thus bringing a direct benefit to the community at large.

Roads and bridges were projected at the same time throughout the island. The first that came out to work from the remoter districts were barefoot, and thought the factor a very extravagant adviser in recommending shoes to all at spade work; but in four years after they all had shoes or strong-laced boots. The exigency of the unparalleled destitution of the years 1846, '47, and '48, caused by the potato failure of 1845, being unprecedented, made it more difficult to deal with in every Highland management, and led to a simultaneous outlay of land improvements, trenching, fencing, &c, in addition to the said roads and fisheries, so as to make work available to all in various parts of the island. Supplies of food (oatmeal, &c.) were early secured by Sir James, and given out to the people during the whole period of destitution 25 per cent, below the current market price.

Schools were placed in hitherto unprovided localities, and endowed by Sir James. Approved of teachers were provided from the Free Church Normal School, Edinburgh, so that the people could send their children without prejudice to sect. At the same time Sir James was opposed to rival schools, but gave sites to the Free Church within a reasonable distance of the existing parish schools, so that all might be useful. He contributed freely to the schools placed in outlying parts by the Edinburgh Ladies' Association for the Highlands and Isles. Still the people did not value this boon, saying that if they sent their children to school they would not remain with them. Now that education is compulsory, it is to be hoped that it will prevail ultimately, and encourage many of the rising surplus population to go abroad, where soil and climate will remunerate with returns for their industry, and enable them to assist their poorer relations at home, and so induce others to follow.

The population in 1841 was about . . . 17,037
And in the year 1881 is stated to be . . . 25,487
Present increase, 8,350

And this shows an increase of one-half in forty years, without including 2231 who took advantage of free emigration in 1850, which, at the same rate of increase, would give about 1000 additional, which implies the necessity for free emigration to relieve the island of its still increasing population beyond what its capabilities can support—especially the we'st coast, where fishing is not available, and the soil and climate unfavourable to cultivation. During my period of office of five years in the Lews, I have no hesitation in stating that the people were better clad and better fed, and the interior of their houses more comfortable from being more amply provided with bedding, &c, and became more self-reliant anDr eady to contract for any piece of work, which at first had to be done by strangers, and were brought actually fifty years in advance to what Sir James found them. The fishermen especially are admitted to excel their neighbours on the mainland, and the well-doing fishers and industrious of the landsmen had deposits in the banks; and certainly there was less excuse for the able-bodied to be in arrears during that period, though the excessively low price of cattle aggravated the distress. Experience shows that if the rent is reasonable, the idly inclined find in the exertion of getting it that they can earn more to help to provide for their families, and would be worse off if they had no rent to pay, as their labour is their capital, and they are thus taught how to turn it to account. Such as will not work or try to exert themselves will ever be a drawback and source of discontent in any community.

There never was a more benevolent, liberal, and large-minded proprietor than Sir James, who, having the means, went hand and heart to ameliorate the condition of his people, and proved, under a ruling Providence, the instrument of saving many lives that would otherwise have perished of starvation. There was not one soul in the island died of want during these years. Lady Matheson was ever kind to the poorer classes, and in planning extensive improvements in the Castle grounds, afforded constant and emunerative employment to the neighbourhood.

It is much to be feared that the response was wanting for all the good that was bestowed so freely, though there are honourable exceptions; and it is to be regretted that the evil disposed and ungrateful should now be pushed forward to misrepresent matters, which can only have the effect of causing mistrust and disappointment ultimately to all concerned.

Without going into particulars, which would make my remarks unnecessarily lengthened, I may refer to Sir John M'Neill's Report on the Western Highlands and Islands, in which it is stated that, between 1845 and 1850. Sir James expended in works executed in the Lews the sum of £101,875, besides gratuities for education and charity to the amount of £65,892, being .£67,980 (exclusive of the cost of management), more than the whole revenue derived from the property during these years. I much regret occupying your valuable time, but think it best to forward this statement, in case it may touch on any point that requires explanation.

JOHN SCOBIE.

Appendix XLV

2010-08-02T17:50:00.001+01:00

STATEMENT by the Rev. EWAN CAMPBELL, Lochs, Stornoway.

THE MANSE, LOCHS, STORNOWAY,
25th August 1883.

I am sorry that much that has been uttered before the Commissioners is misleading and inapplicable to the circumstances of the questions at issue.
' Grievances' presuppose deprivation of RIGHTS. ' The earth being the Lord's and the fulness thereof, the crofters apparently assume that He has given them, as His 'chosen people,' absolute right to the Highlands, and appointed Government as tax-gatherer for their special behoof ! They consider themselves, therefore, empowered by' Right Divine' to spoil the Egyptian proprietors and their tacksmen, whom, nevertheless, they look upon as being ordained to replenish the public purse, out of which they are to draw freely to stock their heritage and build their manor houses ! Conjoined also with this is the strange assumption: That inasmuch as the Highlands are heritages of the Sword, the Clan that fought successfully in robbing, maiming, and ousting the previous occupants of the land, obtained the self-same right to it as the Chieftain of that Clan. Under the shadow of this peculiar allegation, ' The CROFTERS,' or rather their nefarious instigators, ground a 'right' of. repossession, and mutter insane threats of reprisal by this Charter of Right-The Sword of Brenua !' These being apparently the underlying principles of their statements—a disruptive and disorganising principle—permit me to indicate the real facts of the case at issue.

'Townships' were originally held by the occupants on the commonty system, in relation to which the cropping ground was yearly portioned out by [text obliterated] he grazings by ' sooming.' In course of time, the crofting system superseded the yearly ' casting of lots ;' hence the croft still goes under the designation of' lot.' The boundaries of the township, however, remained fixed as theretofore, as the croftage formed ' part and parcel' of the commune as of old. It is thus self-evident that each member of the Communists would have to be served with summons of removal first, with a view to a different settlement, before any encroachment on their rights, by the designing of additional lots out of the commonty, could be perpetrated. That such high-handed encroachments exist, and constitute a serious grievance, is a notorious fact. It cannot be denied that the tendency of such arbitrary encroachments is not only to impoverish but also to enslave a community, by the undermining of that sense of right which lies at the root of a genuine independence. And when to this is superadded the baneful effects of an ' obnoxious charity/ inaugurated by designing, loud-speaking demagogues and self-glorifying bigots, the wonder is how the Highlander, whose poverty and religiosity form a capital for revolutionary 'stump orators' could escape being dragged down to a state of inertness
and dependence. Looking at our Highland scenery, no person except one who is wilfully blind would have thought of ' gulling the public' by pleading for ' compensation for improvements' that are as impossible as they are chimerical ! The truth is, should an Act be passed to-morrow providing for such ' compensation, the contemplated improvements would forever remain a baseless fabric of a vision in the addled brain of the agitator !
Population is so rapidly increasing, in the ' Islands' in particular, that recourse to emigration must inevitably eventuate, while the actual occupant of a croft will have to be allowed, as his legitimate right, to till the commonty. Rents are anything but excessive. The real root of the ' grievance' is to be traced to a reprehensible system of management, and to inertia and sectarian bigotry. The people must be transplanted elsewhere out of the sphere of existing influences, to enable them to raise themselves to a state of manly independence

EWAN CAMPBELL

Appendix XLIV

2010-08-02T17:49:00.001+01:00

STATEMENT of NAPIER CAMPBELL, Esq., Solicitor in Stornoway.

I am a native of Edinburgh, aged 50, and practising for upwards of twenty years as a solicitor in Stornoway, wholly independent of the estate of the sole proprietor of the island of Lews. The following remarks are of the nature and within the scope of my special instructions produced to the Commissioners. It is quite a mistake to suppose, as has been elsewhere suggested, that crofters' grievances are only a thing of yesterday ; and Fenian agitators, if heard, would, I think, leave no permanent impression. Whatever may have influenced them recently, the real question now is, I respectfully submit—Are their grievances real, and if so, can these be remedied ?

This island most undoubtedly is, and has long been, seething in a chronic state of discontent. Any vagrant spark might kindle a dangerous conflagration. What precise shape this unhealthy feeling might ultimately assume no one can predict. The crofters of Uig and Lochs petitioned Lady Matheson to allow her factor, William M'Kay, Esq., to meet them in conference in order to discuss their alleged grievances. She declined ; and in a published letter, she used the word 'dare' and called them rebels! Now Lewsmen are, as yet, loyal to Queen and country. They have broken no law. They are a frugal, industrious, sober, shrewd, peaceable, and a notably religious people. In Argyllshire, where I was for eight years in law offices, extensive evictions were being made. Intelligent Highlanders spoke feelingly and bitterly of the cruelty, harshness, and oppression suffered by ' the poor people' (especially where estates fell into other hands than the good old Highland lairds). ' Compelled,' they said, ' to leave their bonnie glens or straths, and heath-clad hillside pastures, for which their ancestors had fought and bled, their hearts were " wae " (very sad). In violation, too, of the crofter's right of tenancy—a more ancient charter' they maintained, 'than the sheep-skin parchments of decaying feudalism—their homesteads were unroofed and their hearths made dark and cold. They were, as in the island of Islay and elsewhere, ruthlessly forced abroad in masses from the country of their hearts, sometimes under the dread of army bayonets, among aliens in language, religion, and sympathy, and with no other dirge than the weeping and wailing of their women and children.' ' Where now,' they exclaimed, are the 300 stalwart Islaymen who, under their chief, Campbell of Islay (and his sons), came to swell the gay pageant of a truly Highland welcome given by their over-lord, the Duke of Argyll, to their Royal Sovereign in 1847, on her first visit to Inveraray ?' (See Leaves on Our Tour in Highlands, p. 80.). No wonder if Highlanders sometimes croon melancholy laments, and brood in sickly silence over the evil fortunes of their once martial race. It is their proverbial submission to authority and their literal faith in the decrees of Providence, almost approaching to fatalism, that keeps them humble. Naturally they are proud, high-spirited, and sentimentally impulsive. Highlanders idolise the Queen, who writes so favourably of them and their beloved country. Some protection has been afforded to crofters in later years, by the growth of public opinion, based on the policy of denuding the Highlands of brave, strong, hardy, well-made men, whose very history, and their reverence for it, ——make them heroes on the battle-held, while in peace they are a law-abiding, home-loving, and a God-fearing people. Wholesale evictions have thus become less frequent. Some proprietors have, fortunately, more regard for reputation than a heavy rent roll Others, not a few, continue quietly evicting by legal process, and clearing by so-called ' voluntary' emigration. The lawyer's pen supercedes the soldier's steel. This depopulation, gild it as you may, is a bitter pill to swallow. Yet it is not rapid enough for proprietors who look only at the most immediately profitable side of the question. With this brief introduction, permit me now, most respectfully to state :—

I. The Grievances of Lewis Crofters:
These are as follows :—

1. Wholesale evictions from good land now under deer and sheep, e.g.,
Morsgeil, Lynshader, and Park.

2. Shifting whole townships, and sometimes individuals, from place to place, without any compensation for improvements. This is spoken of as one of the most frequent forms of eviction in Lews. I remember one instance on the very outskirts of Stornoway. About twenty-seven crofters were removed from Widow's Row to Valleyfield or elsewhere. From crofts reclaimed, built upon, manured and tilled, they are suddenly compelled to shift to rough bog or bare rocky land, there again to reclaim, build, and cultivate, only perhaps to be again shifted. Those so shifted are crowded in upon other townships. This has a tendency to create mutual discontent. Individuals have been thus shifted three times.

3. Individual evictions of a revengeful or capricious nature, sometimes accompanied by aggravations of the evil. I have in view a recent case at Callanish, but other examples have, from time to time, come under my notice. Sometimes the outcasts cannot get a bit of land to build on, and they are refused parochial relief or other work.

4. In townships and individually they are frequently exposed to encroachments or minor readjustments to their loss. Cases of this kind are known to me down to recent date, and the ' Bernera Trial Pamphlet.' Thus, while their families increase, their holdings diminish. The rent remains the same. They have to bear indirect increase of rent and other exactions which, though small in amount, press heavily on poor families.

5. The ' arable land/ and sometimes the grazing and peat-ground, is limited and very poor. Hence the cry for ' more land.' One effect of small crofts is M'Millan, crofter, Lemeraway, I observed three generations (sixteen persons, I think) in one bedroom. Lastly, it is impossible to extract a bare living from very small crofts.

6. The rents are in excess of the true agricultural or pastoral value of the lands. Such rents are a virtual tax upon the fishing industry, which is their main source of livelihood. The soil is naturally semi-sterile. It is thin and light. Its substance gets blown away and washed out. What little sun there is, is generally accompanied, up till mid-summer, by cold blighting winds, and sometimes the weather breaks up before the meagre crops can be secured.

7. As tenants-at-will (that is, tenants holding land, &c , under the legal presumed verbal lease for one year terminable at Whitsunday), the crofters have long been, and still are, insulted, trampled upon, and terrorised over. Examples of this would just be to give the unwritten history of Lewis. Their submission to authority, lay and clerical, is well known. All this, combined with despair of redress, engenders a condition of servility, listlessness, and dependence, which undermines their manliness, their moral virtues, and their self-reliance. A conventional lease (that is a written lease—a Lewis one in particular—vide ' Rules of Estate') would not improve their condition. It would only place them more in the power of estate lawyers.

8. The crofters (and I can endorse this grievance) complain that there is virtually no law for their redress ; but in any view, they dare not resort to law with their laird or any one under the shelter oi his ample wing. During my long experience I could see no other alternative in all such cases, than to counsel instant submission, lest worse should come of it. It is not for themselves alone that crofters are concerned. Their parents, grand-parents, wives, and little ones share their anxious solicitude. To all these they are, as a rule, much attached and remarkably kind. They will work hard and endure much to keep the old people' off the poofs roll. They positively shudder at the every-day threat,' I'll put you out of your lands.' Frequency does not rob this threat of its terrors (indifferent as their lands sometimes are). They get off lightly by paying 30s. as the law costs of a removing !

II. -Remedies.
The remedies which occur to me are:—

1. Enlarged crofts for such as desire them, of average quality, of 'arable land,' with sufficient pasturage and peat-ground for each township.

2. Failing the proprietor providing the necessary land within a reasonable time, and to the crofter's satisfaction, power to take such land as purchasers, on the analogy of railways, or for occupation merely, on equitable valuation and decree of Court.

3. Absolute security from eviction, so long as the crofter is not hopelessly in arrear and performs his crates as tenant. By ' hopelessly' I mean three years' arrears without value therefor, and for the next year's rent on the lands. By 'duties' I mean such as modern statutes would impose.

4. A fair rent should be judicially fixed, on the basis of a neutral valuation at the outset. It should not thereafter be raised, or the possession disturbed, for nineteen years, and then only under a new valuation and decree.

5. In the event of eviction, or loss of tenancy otherwise, the crofter should be entitled to full compensation for buildings, fences, drains, and other permanent improvements, on well-defined principles.

6. Anxious and minute provisions—
(1) against proprietory influence ;
(2) to secure fair valuations of rent and compensation ;
(3) to provide cheap, summary, and efficient courts ; and
(4) for protection at the ballot-box. The object of all such provisions is that, so far as possible, the crofter ought, when not in fault, to be quite free and independent in defending his public and private rights as an humble member of a great empire.

7. Any Government grants in aid could not, in my opinion, be better applied than in the reduction of assessments for roads; schools, and poor.

III. Some practical suggestions

The foregoing proposals may be further elucidated:—

1. I do not propose to take present statistics. These are virtually factorial figures. There ought to be a full, careful, and minute neutral survey of all croft lands, and lands suitable for crofts, in addition to a proper classification of Campbell, the rural population, in order to discover how many families might really require land, and to what extent, and also whether and where that can equitably be provided for them. Many widows and poor persons might not wish more land.

2. Such survey might also embrace the forelands of the shores. These are already secured to fishermen and others by old Fishery Acts for fishing purposes; but the said Acts are disregarded—
(1) owing to the difficulty of recovering the penalties ; and
(2) from dread of conflict with the lord of the manor.

3. For neutral valuations I respectfully suggest the appointment of wellpaid officials, like fishery officers, specially qualified one to reside at each seat of Court. These officers could send statistical reports to the Crown, take an active superintendence of crofts, give all necessary information, and value rents and compensation. It should be optional always, to either party, to demand the valuation of a non-resident official.

4. As to lands taken on compulsion, the analogy of railways seems to be, constitutionally, preferable to the proposal of a Government purchase. The same analogy suggests the creation of an intermediatory board, such as croft commissioners, elected like burgh commissioners, with borrowing powers, power to appoint district comptrollers (superceding ground officers and farm constables), and generally with powers for enforcing sanitary arrangements, simple improvements in dwellings, agriculture, and such like, for the benefit of all concerned. Such boards would educate crofters to exercise the franchise, and manage their own concerns. In these boards might be vested, ad interim, all lands taken on compulsion, and the ' forelands.' The encouragement of fishing settlements all along the coast suggests one remedy for future overcrowding. This would greatly increase the value of adjoining lands per acre; and fishing might, in due time, become self-supporting.

5. The Crown appointment of procurator-fiscal should be put on the same footing, as regards prohibition from agency, as sheriffs and sheriff-clerks. In no case whatever ought fiscals, or any one identified with them, to be agents for landed proprietors within the county where the estate is situated.

6. I attach almost vitally importance to the great protection which cheap, summary, and efficient Courts would afford. Our Small-Debt Court (if it allowed the successful party relief against the loser for agency) with a Circuit Appeal Court of three principal sheriffs, furnishes an excellent model. Long residence of local sheriffs would find in this powerful appeal Court a counterpoise. Such used to be the Appeal Court for valuations ; but it would be a great improvement thereon that sittings should be frequent, and that they should be held in each district seat of Court. It might be called the Lands Appeal Court. If successful it might also, by after extension to all sheriff court cases, supercede the present double sheriffship. The cost to the country would, by thus utilising existing machinery on tried lines, be quite nominal. An agency fee of 7s. 6d. for the local Court, and 12s. 6d. additional for appeal, if taken, would be within the reach of any crofter. A more liberal allowance would be required, and be reasonable, in township cases. Such Court would, I am satisfied, contrast favourably with Irish Land and Appeal Courts (1) on the grounds of expense; efficiency; and despatch; and (2) political jealousies incidental to party appointments would thereby be obviated.

7. I here confine myself to pointing out deficits leaving the appropriate remedy to abler hands. Our present ballot system does not protect poor, dependent, and illiterate crofters. The polling officer is no doubt sworn; but, in remote districts, he is virtually nominated by the proprietor. He is closeted alone with the voter. Now, under pressure or strong electoral excitement, any of the following three things may happen:—
1st, the officer, contrary to the spirit of the ballot, must know who the elector votes for;
2nd, he can easily deceive such voter by misdirecting him in recording his cross-mark; and
3rd, if the voter is undecided in his choice, he can, at a critical moment, influence him,

8. In the event of a competition for or choice of crofts, a preference should be given to soldiers, army reserve men, militia, naval sailors or marines, naval coast volunteers, and merchant seamen.

IV. Illustration

Underlying all the foregoing grievances, remedies, and practical suggestions, or ranking highest in importance among them, is the operation of existing laws affecting crofters. This cannot be better illustrated than from my own experience as ' opposition' agent in Lews.

An urgent cry for a law agent reached me in Edinburgh in May 1863. Promised both moral and material support, I responded to the call. Six or seven agents had failed to establish a footing. I am here yet. But owing to all appointments of profit going one way, I can appreciate the bitter truth propounded by Lord Macdonald's agent at Portree—I have had great difficulty in 'making my tea out of it.' The town was in a ferment about the foreshores dispute. I was welcomed by the most prominent townsmen. Alas ! how few of those can appear here to-day! One of my first duties was, under estate opposition, to get Stornoway created a police burgh, so as to give the people a status to defend their public rights. The proprietor's purchase of the foreshores of Loch Stornoway was considered a breach of good faith. He had been applied to by ' the people' to obtain for them a Harbour Act to legalise the levying of dues on quays built by their ancestors and maintained by themselves. Instead of this he purchased the foreshores for himself, whereby he, in addition to a now very valuable foreshore property, claimed exclusive control over said quays and over the public pier, which formed the only outlet for the crofters' cattle, sheep, eggs, and fish, and the customary inlet for their clothing, oatmeal, flour, tea, sugar, tobacco, and all other necessaries and luxuries of life. He would also acquire exclusive control over the principal shipping and fishing industries of the island. No sooner was this purchase effected, than sixty householders were dispossessed, by an equal number of actions of declarator in the Court of Session, of valuable curing stations in front of their feus. With very few exceptions the feuars were either too poor or too timid to defend. The people, however, acting in concert, challenged the purchase in Parliament, on the ground, inter alia, of a very inadequate price having been paid. They not only petitioned, but they eent a special deputation to London and secured the services of several members of Parliament in support thereof. Measures of punishment were resorted to. Many of my earlier patrons were defending themselves from vexatious legal proceedings and other implications. Some became bankrupt, others emigrated, while many are dead. Concurrent therewith, measures of intimidation were instituted against one or more bankers, doctors, shipowners, fishcurers, public officials, bakers, general merchants, tradesmen, labourers, and others who were in any way in the reverence or under dread of the estate (Who are not ?). A lithographed copy of the said petition, with facsimile signatures, was pointed out to me in situ. It was hung up in the factor's office. Parties who had signed it were invited or induced to call. They were asked, ' Is that your signature ?' if answered, ' It is/ or ' It is like it,' they were then asked to withdraw their signatures and sign a counter petition. Those who refused, and many did refuse, were told significantly ' You will get no more estate work or estate money'! Sir James Matheson was then residing in the island, and personally negotiating with the people. A compromise was ultimately arrived at, and sanctioned by the Harbours Trust Act of 1865. It was only, however, of a very limited nature. The said foreshore' right, with the acquired curing stations, a large claim for feu-duty and sundry other valuable rights, including a preponderating control over the trust, were carefully conserved or secured to the proprietor. Mr M'Kay, in his statement, classes expenditure on the said curing stations as expenditure for the good of Stornoway! The estate has been drawing rent for these stations for eighteen years, and feu-duty for the quays and pier—say, in all, £3500! He refers also to outlays on the public pier. These, if really expended, were made in the hope that the pier would belong to the estate, and, being carefully provided for, the capital sum over £800, with 6 per cent per annum for interest, was duly repaid. The original price of the foreshores, of which the proprietor still retains nearly the whole, was little over £300, and the actual outlays on the curing stations very nominal. Altogether the said foreshore purchase was a brilliant pecuniary success for the proprietor, and at same time a serious encroachment on public and private rights.
The courts of justice, particularly the Sheriff Courts, were almost unanimously complained of. This was a substantial grievance. In the majority of cases the decision of the local sheriff was final; and where not so, only a few had the means to resort to higher courts. Mr Andrew Lothian Macdonald held this office for twenty-eight years prior to November 1871. In private life he was an amiable and accomplished gentleman ; but latterly well advanced in years, as was also the then local sheriff-clerk, Mr Colin Leitch. With the utmost desire to avoid giving offence to the relatives of those two gentlemen, both now dead, I fear that I cannot conscientiously discharge the important duty I have undertaken without stating that neither of those gentlemen appeared to me to maintain the position and dignity of their respective offices, in the face of arbitrary power. I now refer to Justice of Peace Courts. In 1868, the estate promulgated a policy of restricting ' drinking facilities.' As regards hotels, & c , these were and are very summarily dealt with, under a series of general resolutions of the justices, and under estate and Good Templar influence. Under this new regime, 1st, all back-doors of hotels, even those almost indispensable for domestic purposes, were shut up ; 2nd, with one very marked exception, all licensed houses were ordered to close at 9 o'clock P.M.; 3rd, all new licences were refused ; and 4th; even renewals could not in many instances be obtained,—in other words, old-established licences were withdrawn from houses without any fault alleged much less proved. Great hardships were thus not infrequent. The said earlyclosing hour was continued until the Court of Session established in the Rothesay case that certificates with that hour were illegal, whereupon the original hour of 11 o'clock P.M. was restored. For a time there were a few independent justices who refused to apply general rules to all cases ; most of those, from death, removal, or other cause, ceased to act, while the remainder (probably finding themselves in a helpless minority) changed their views. In all the latest Licensing Courts the justices appear as if acting in concert like one man, under the guidance of the present factor, a justice of the peace. They support the above policy adverse to hotels, &c. The Quarter Sessions Appeal Court at Dingwall now acts with almost like unanimity. Sir James Matheson was for many years Lord-Lieutenant for Ross-shire, and his influence was used in the nomination of justices, &c. In the landward part of this populous island next in size to Ireland, there is not one licensed house for the accommodation of the public or of tourists, travellers, or others. Compare this with the policy pursued by Sir Alexander Matheson of Ardross on the mainland, who has beneficially I believe, expended £10,733 on hotels—more than he has expended in shooting lodges, and bank offices together, and nearly as much as on roads. As to the Lewis crofters, they are not consulted in the matter, yet it is alleged that they are the special objects and causes of all this very anxious solicitude. They are said to be intemperate. This I deny. Even prior to the inauguration of this policy I never knew a more sober people as a class. One of the J.P.'s, a very worthy rural clergyman, having warmly advocated the withdrawal of the licence from the only inn in his parish, stated that ' drunkenness was alarmingly on the increase.' On being asked to specify the number of people in his parish who were known to him to be ' addicted to drink,' he very innocently replied,' I only know one man of my people of whom that can be said,' and he subsequently admitted that' this man did not patronise the inn in question.' I also deny that the crofters are extravagant; they are quite remarkable for economy. Such an extreme policy is in many ways hurtful. So far as crofters alone are concerned, it is a serious encroachment on their liberty. It is only one of a multitude of like extremes, the outcome of all which is the almost total subversion of freedom.

I now mention two procurator-fiscal illustrations. There had been a skirmish in town between certain unpopular police, since removed, and some crofters from Knock, which was followed by mobbing and rioting. The fiscals, or one of them, wrote to Sheriff Cook in Edinburgh, asking him to try the complaints before a jury elsewhere,' because a local jury could not be trusted to convict in a question with the police.' It was further alleged that 'the police required protection.' Happening accidentally to call on Sheriff Cook, he questioned me and handed me the letter containing remarks to the above effect. My answer was,' I think it is the people who require protection from the police.' This view turned out to be correct. The police, it was clearly proved, were originally in the wrong, and, while wrong, they used their batons too freely, drawing blood. This led, probably in despair of other redress, to the police being on a subsequent occasion mobbed by a large gathering from Knock. Sheriff Cook wisely entrusted the cases to a local jury. A unanimous verdict was given against the men who broke the law by mobbing; thus showing that local juries were just like other upright juries. Again, in a series of letters laid before the County Commissioners of Police, and published in the press, the Lews crofters were called ' hereditary sheep-stealers.' The people were naturally indignant. Mr Sellars of Park Farm apologised at a public meeting; he said he was misled as a stranger. Mr Munro also stated that in the whole of his experience as fiscal he had never known one case of sheep-stealing in the island. Meantime, however, two extra policemen were stationed in Lochs, thereby increasing the rates and adding another link to the heavy chain of absolutism. After this meeting, having called at the factor's office, I found the factor in high glee; he was studying some water-coloured drawings of sheeps' heads. One of these he held out at arm's length, saying ' Don't you admire it ?' The full force of the joke I was then unable to appreciate. It was evident, however, that the meeting must have interrupted a congenial task. Time partly unfolded the mystery. A crofter retained me to defend him against a charge of sheep-stealing. It was only a dispute between neighbouring crofters about ear-marks, which were often much alike, and the disputes settled in a Small-Debt Court. The said drawings probably referred to this case. Before the criminal court day arrived, my services were dispensed with. The accused pled guilty. I was much surprised at this, and through a reliable source I ascertained that he admitted having been induced, he would not say by whom, to plead guilty, on the assurance that he would save an agency fee, and get off lightly. His fine was small. But here was a recorded conviction for sheep-stealing. Another conviction took place about the same time of a Harris man, who was thereafter placed at Valleyfield, much to the indignation of the crofters there. From that date he became the marked recipient of factorial favour. Indeed, such implicit confidence had the factor in this man's honesty, that he located him just where he could, if so disposed, help himself to the fattest (estate) wedders in the island! I never heard of any conviction for sheep-stealing either before or since.

The late Sir James Matheson, Baronet of Achany and the Lews, M.P., and Lord-Lieutenant for Ross-shire, was a great man, a public benefactor, a resolute pioneer of progress, the architect of his own colossal fortunes, most hospitable, and sometimes profusely benevolent. Alas! there is another side to this picture. He was peculiarly accessible to flattery through the public press. In addition to the factor and his staff industriously fostering this specialty, any one who could write local articles was speedily secured and patronised. Their constant theme was laudation of the proprietor. Thus the outside public came to have a different ideal portrait of him from that which had slowly and silently corroded itself into the popular heart. Appeals on the ground of poverty seldom, if ever, moved him to relax one condition of a hard bargain. The usual answer was, ' Sir James will not negotiate till you place yourself entirely at his mercy. If you do not so submit you must take the consequences,' &c. To anything dignified with the name of 'estate policy' all must bow with almost Oriental docility. He carefully left poor people who were compelled to negotiate with him in defence of their rights, on a most unequal footing, to be dealt with by his lawyers, who enjoyed an exclusive monopoly of all local influence and power, and who zealously exercised it, in most things, to the full measure of its capacity. The policy of the estate—not under one factor alone—but steadily pursued through nearly all factors, for a long course of years, must, I fear, if truth is to be spoken, be characterised as a tortuous, subtle, and aggressive one in pursuit of territorial aggrandisement and despotic power, so absolute and arbitrary as to be almost universally complained of. No one could reside long in Stornoway without observing and feeling this encroaching spirit Virtually 26,000 people complained, and still complain, of one.

The factor or 'chamberlain' who enjoyed most of the proprietor's confidence, and longest retained it, was Mr Donald Munro, solicitor. His various titles are enumerated in the Bernera phamphlet. He held office for twenty-one years prior to 1875. In the said Bernera trial he deponed to his having taken out and ordered execution of forty removings without even consulting the resident proprietor, who looked very closely after his own business! Were I to attempt to give some conception of the popular ideal of such factors, I would have to resort to metaphors such as Bismarck for his iron rule and farreaching diplomacy ; King Theodore, surrounded by his terrified prisoners and Campbell, trembling subjects, boasting of his invincibility in his own remote Magdala, pursuing, even to the bitter end, his measures of revenge, tyranny, and oppression while ' hugging his big guns.' Or I might refer to the legend of the Scottish Border, which describes the English matron hushing her fractious babe to sleep with the terror of the Douglas' name. I would still leave much to the imagination. Mr Charles Innes, agent in said Bernera trial, wittily declared that, on his first visit to Lews, he thought the people had ' Factor on the brain.' It is only fair, however, to Mr Munro to say that his immediate predecessor, Mr John Munro Mackenzie, a native of the island, did not enjoy a much more enviable reputation, while Mr M'Kav, the present chamberlain, has been so long in the estate office, under both of the said Messrs Mackenzie and Munro, and the estate and legal machinery remain so much alike (if not stronger than ever), that, if there is any change for the better, it is only a question of degree. I have complaints from townships and individuals, aye, even of parishes in quite recent times. So that the conclusion I draw is, that as the present system would spoil any man, even one quite new to it, so Mr M'Kay only requires time and circumstances to develop into the usual type of factors of great proprietors in remote districts of the far north.

The long exercise of too much power has a depreciating influence. I could frequently recognise the late proprietor's own master-mind. The master makes the servant. I took good care, for causes to be explained, that he should be unable to plead ignorance of what was going on in his name and for his behoof in anything I had on hand. Mr Munro's zeal for his employer was beyond question. The rental of the estate, which was about £10,000 in 1844, is now nearly £18,000. The rental, however, does not, I think, show all or anything like all, the various exactions imposed on crofters. It will not, in particular, show the law costs recovered —one very severe method of punishment, and not an uncommon one. Were I to mention cases with large tenants and cases affecting property in town, in which the fiscal element generally figures, I could still more forcibly illustrate the view I have expressed as to the estate policy and system; but the strict relevancy thereof might not so readily appear. One of the most perplexing elements I encountered was a secret partnership between the factor (Munro) and the estate agent (Ross), which they and the proprietor appeared to be most anxious to conceal. They were openly enough joint-fiscals. They kept a joint bank account. In the case Skinner v. Stephen, Mr Ross swore to this partnership. I could never obtain evidence of its dissolution. In another case, the Proprietor v. K . Murray Ness, Sheriff Cook commented on the singularity of the one partner acting for the pursuer and the other for the defender. This curious phenomena was not infrequent. The partnership was very visible to me. Yet many believed there was no partnership. I am very difficult to persuade that it does not exist at this moment, all outward appearances to the contrary notwithstanding. I raised this question about five years ago in open Court; but Sheriff Wilson did not allow the inquiry to proceed. I have met the factor Munro in seven different capacities in one case (John M'lver's). I also heard him boast of appearing in sixteen distinct capacities at one time ! He could thus cut himself up into sixteen different personages in law, or he could, at pleasure, unite all these parts or personages into one great person under the powerful name of the sole proprietor of Lews. To follow the intricate windings of a Lewis legal labyrinth, in the hope of obtaining justice, required great independence, some means, considerable nerve, and resolute steadiness of purpose. Above all, it required a reliable tribunal within the compass of the person's purse. How seldom could all these elements be united in Lews. The poor crofter was least of all fitted for such a contest. It was like fighting with some hydra-headed monster. Nor was it free from serious risk to an agent—as I experienced. In defending a tenant (Alexander) from vexatious litigation and a network of complications of a very peculiar character, I used words which were so far indiscreet, that I did not see my way to defend an action of damages for £1000 in Court of Session. I preferred to retract and pay £30 of expenses. The wielders of this terrible complex legal machinery could almost be ' a law unto themselves.' Silence resulted from sheer dread. One of my earliest cases was to defend a poor crofter named Beaton. His only cow having strayed on Goathill farm it was ' poind-folded' (an old Scotch remedy for trespass). Beaton offered double trespass money (2s. 6d.). This was refused, and a warrant to sell the cow applied for. The cost of this warrant, unopposed, would exceed the value of the cow, and a sale would leave a balance to pay at next rent collection. On my appearing for Beaton he was threatened with fiscal proceedings and to be put out of his lands. I protected him from these threats and succeeded in restoring his cow, under appeal to Sheriff Cook, who reprimanded the said local sheriff for language used in his decision.

C O N C L U S I O N.

The foregoing statement or memorial has been written altogether in vain if my purpose is not self-evident. It is not any individual I desire to assail, it is a system. If I could, in justice to others, avoid names I would do no. Confining myself to matters within my own cognisance, I have sought to prove that the poor, humble, but respectable Lews crofter has much to complain of. He could hardly be happy and contented under such a system. Our crofters are quite unused to Royal Commissioners. They hardly know how to express their deep-seated inner feelings to the representatives of their Sovereign. So few are independent of estate influence that they hardly knew who to trust as advisers. Their evidence has been given under the chilling presence of a factor. A few words of assurance from him cannot instantly dissolve this spell. It would require much longer time and more systematic preparation than they have had to exhaust the Lews evidence. For every delegate examined they could of&r two more. No doubt the evidence given by themselves should thus be all the more valuable—but as an expose of such a minute and elaborate system it is very incomplete. It is contended that the Lews crofter will compare well with his Irish neighbour. They desire permission to live, quietly and peaceably, by their hereditary pursuit of joint land culture and fishing, for which mode of life they seem peculiarly adapted. Their sons have a striking aptitude for mercantile pursuits. Left to themselves many leave the island and emigrate. This class have been remarkably successful Assisted emigration, as hitherto carried out, is the total breaking up of their home with all its association. It is dispersion or virtual annihilation as a race. They complain, too, of injustice in former emigration arrangements. The factor, they say, gave what he pleased, and inadequate value, for their stock, crop, and effects. Be all that as it may, they have a deep-rooted antipathy to compulsory or disguised expatriation. Migration, as distinguished from emigration, they are already used to ; and, even though not hitherto conducted on equitable or enlightened principles, they submit to it. Their feelings are not thereby so seriously outraged nor their fears and prejudices aroused. For many a year to come, every able-bodied man, with a taste for the sea, is required in Lews. Our fisheries are only in their infancy. We have no oyster farms, which are said to be very profitable.—See Bertram's work on Fisheries. If proprietors should be, by force of law, compelled to make reasonable concessions to their poor tenantry, every one pound sterling spent on harbours, piers, coast-roads, telegraphs, and such-like aids to the development of our fisheries, as a great national industry and nursery for our maritime supremacy, will have the practical effect, in course of time—while operating as a widespread boon—of amply compensating sea-coast proprietors. Sir James Matheson asked £16 per acre for the site of the Free Church Manse (now Greenfield's Manse). Could he ever have dreamed of such a price—or even the present price of feu stances—but for the fishing industry at Stornoway ?—

In respect whereof,
NAPIER CAMPBELL

Appendix XLIII

2010-08-02T17:48:00.000+01:00

REMARKS upon the Land Question in general, and in the Island of Lewis in particular,
by the Rev. DONALD J. MARTIN, Free Church Minister, Stornoway.

My age is 36 last birthday. I am the son of the late Dr Donald Martin, sometime proprietor of Roshven, parish of Ardnamurchan, lately tacksman of Monkstadt, Isle of Skye. I have a competent knowledge of Gaelic. I have resided in the Island of Lewis since December 1875. It was not to-day, nor even in connection with the Commission, that I began to think of the land question, or of the condition of the crofter population in the Highlands, though I have had my attention drawn to the subject more closely of late in connection, firstly, with the destitution of last winter, and, secondly, the appointment of a Royal Commission. I have come to any conclusion upon the matter entirely from the workings of my own mind with regard to the question/and from facts within my own knowledge, apart from any agitation from without or within this island, or the arguments of any person, except so far as these tended to throw light upon the subject. In regard to this I may say that I have got more light in controversy with opponents of some of my views than from some of the professed friends of the crofters, for in examining into counter statements and their foundation, I have been led at times into a confirmation of my own views of the matter. I was far, very far at first from approving the action of either the Braes or Glendale crofters, but when upon the back of this agitation came the general destitution due to one storm of not over great severity, and the failure of one crop, I was awakened to the fact that underneath both these things there lay some great reason, some principle. We had only surface manifestations in these effects, the causes of which had to be found out, as also the remedies, not, as subscriptions and charity, surface ones, but such as would cope with the causes. I could not believe, and I do not yet believe, that either of the causes assigned will account for the effects. It has been said, and perhaps such views may have some weight with the Commission (I hope not), that the manifestations in Skye were due to agitators alone, and that the destitution all over was due solely to the one bad season. To my mind these reasons are not sufficient nor satisfactory, because, while giving all due allowance to both these factors (and no reasonable man can deny their existence), yet they do not account for all nor even most of the effects. Of this the appointment of the Commission itself is a proof. It proves that the Government of the day saw cause for inquiry. An old proverb says, ' there was water where the stirk was drowned.' Taking even the most unfavourable view of the action of agitators, how could such manifestations of determined and combined assertion of rights to be secured and grievances to be redressed have been either got up or maintained without a sense of wrong and suffering, long smouldering but suppressed. It is not a thing of to-day this feeling in Lewis, and this demand by the people for land once theirs. The Rev. Hector Cameron told me that as far back as nineteen years ago, when he was teacher of the Ladies' Association School in Park Lochs the feeling was almost as strong as it is to-day. That would, I think, have been about the time that Sellar took the farm, the lease being, as at last Whitsunday, the circumstances thus corresponding exactly with those of this year. Again the secession in Uig from the Free Church was as much if not more of a land question than a church one. These are the two spots in Lewis, Park and Uig, in which at this time the move for land began, and the people there both took action before there was any word of the matter either by agitators or others. How again could one storm and one bad season produce all this general want ? It stands proved, to my mind at least, whose workings I here give to the Commission, that under all this agitation and this general destitution there lie causes to be explained other than surface or present, and remedies to be applied other than superficial or temporary.

My observations throughout the Highlands have led me to the conclusion that most, if not all, of the lands that exist, either as arable or pasture farms, have been made what they are by the crofters that once occupied them and redeemed them, in part at least, from waste throughout their long term of occupancy. I believe that the crofters have in the past been the real improvers of the Highlands, for even where the proprietors have subsequently improved you find the foundation of that laid by the crofters ; and where that has not been the case, but where the proprietor has worked directly upon the primitive bog or even ' cul,' the work has been altogether or in part a failure. This was acknowledged by Mr Mackay, and I have heard it said, but the truth of it I cannot vouch for of course (the Commissioners may perhaps know), that the Duke of Sutherland now repents not having given out the ground in Sutherland to those who would have in time taken it in, in place of himself spending so much upon it, the return for which he will never get. As to the Lewis, no greater mistake in the interests of the crofters themselves, not to say of truth, could have been made than to assert that Sir James never did anything for this island. Figures and facts prove the contrary; Sir James must get his due. But these improvements were in great measure a mistake according to the chamberlain's own evidence—a mistake not of heart but of head. I find the people, as a whole, ever ready to admit the fact of Sir James's expenditure for improvements' sake, and also his kindly intentions in all these. What the people at least meant in denying such improvements or such efforts for their good was that the benefits of such never reached them directly—in other words, that the way in which the land improvements were carried on was a mistake. That is my own opinion, for I firmly believe that if Sir James were alive to-day he would be the first to acknowledge his mistake, and also, so far as in his power lay, to remedy it. my belief is, that if instead of spending his money as he did with the noblest of intentions, he had devised a scheme either of loan previous to or of compensation after improvements to the people themselves, mora land would by this time have been reclaimed, more permanently improved at less outlay, and with the money returned by this time in rent, interest, and land value. Is it not a fact that farms from which small tenants have been removed in the course of a few years deteriorate ? Monkstadt, as attested by the rigs, had once been all occupied by crofters. It is so in this island. Park, the Uig farms, Dalbeg, Galson, & c , were all once occupied by crofters ; even the rich parks about the town were once so held. There is another thing I remember in connection with my father's farm ; there was attached to it a narrow but rich strip of hill pasture between the hills of two crofter townships, Totescore and Graulain. So little return did my father get from the hill that he had to give up the lease. The case came to this, that either of two things would need to happen—either that the crofters of Graulain should get Linicro, or that they should he removed and their hill and township be added to the tack. This latter, of course, my father would not consent to, neither would the landlord give him off the rent of the hill; so he gave up the lease. What happened ? I do not know how it happened, but the crofters of the two townships opposite, Tote and Graulain, were removed (Mr Macdonald, factor, said they were not evicted), and sent, I do not know all where, but some of them were, I know, crowded on to the Kilmaluag township, and the next time I passed through Kilmuir the tacksman of Monkstadt's sheep and cattle were browsing amidst the ruins of the once well-known hamlets of Hole and Graulain. This is only a specimen of the way in which matters have been moving. It is not for me to dictate to others, the possessors of the soil, but my opinion, in looking back, is that the process should have been reversed, and that instead of the tacksman getting those townships with their hills, the townships should have got Linicro at a fair rent. In my view it is a mistake having arable even, but especially grazing farms, in the vicinity of crofters, except under two conditions:—first, that the crofters have sufficient run to render trespass on their part unnecessary and therefore inexcusable ; and secondly, that the two be properly fenced against one another. What one deprecates is, that, as has hitherto been in most cases the case, the matter has almost always been decided against the crofter. That has at least been the tendency, which state of matters of course bears an explanation. Two things lie at the root of this:—(1) the better rent that tacksmen give, or rather have given; (2) the eaving of trouble and expenses in connection with the lifting of the same,—or, as the Duke of Argyle put it, the pleasure to the landlord of getting his rent in one large sum twice a year without any trouble or expense. In the sequel I shall notice both of these. Another thing I should notice in connection with the question is that of rotations of crop. As a fact, for I used often to notice it as a boy, and my father often remarked it, the crofter next us, John Macdonald, had his rotation as regularly as my father, though even John did not make the most of his ground, but his good sized holding enabled him to have a rotation and graze his horses and cattle without trespass or need of it.

As to Lewis and its problem, this can be stated shortly. It is not a question of rent at all, that is to say, of price per acre. I think Mr Maciver, Uig, was entirely wrong in his view. I believe there is no laud in Scotland cheaper per acre than Lewis land, and as I consider that in this land question the interests of landlord and tenant should be shown to be identical, as I believe they are, I deprecate any reduction of rent, and am of opinion rather that with more land per family the crofter could and would give more per acre, so that so far from the rent being halved, it could at any rate be maintained at the same figure, or even raised. It is entirely a question of the quantity, not the price, and in some instances the quality. I may have an acre for nothing, but I could not live on it; but give me, say one hundred—some arable, some pasture, and I could not only live, but afford to pay a price per acre remunerative to my landlord. As you diminish the holdings you necessarily make the little the crofters have to pay a burden ; but as you increase them you necessarily lighten the burden of the rent, even though it be higher per acre. It is a question at present of congested population and how to relieve it. Here is the thing at a glance. In 1846 the population of Lewis was about 18,000, in 1883 it is 26,000, or about half as much again, though they occupy less, or at any rate, not more ground than in 1846. I cannot lay my hands on the acreage under crofters in 1846 as compared with 1883 ; but looking at Uig removals and those of Galson, I think it would show that not only has there beer a natural increase of population, but also a decrease of area. The Commissioners themselves might inquire into this. Let us suppose the area to be the same, then we have a population half as much again as in 1846 upon the same area. Stornoway. [I need not here enter into the question of the subdivision and how it came about, whether by blame of people or estate management, or both combined; what we have to do with is the present state of matters, however brought about.] So far we arc all agreed; but when we come to fix upon the remedy, then come difference and difficulties.
I. The crofters own remedy and demand is more land. There is objected to this—
1. That there is no land.
2. That even supposing there is land, it is inexpedient to extend the crofter area.

Let us examine these separately.
Q. 1. That there is no land.
—Those that say there is no land must mean no waste, or rather unoccupied land. This the crofters grant, but point to the large arable and pasture farms, especially those once under crofters ; and I think as thus put, especially as they have in their request for land regard to present leases, the fact of there being land is indisputable and undeniable. Whether there be enough is another question. my general answer to this last would be, let it be honestly tried. There is one serious charge I have myself to bring against the present management, and that is that no attempt has been made even to try any remedy in this direction, and I think that much of the irritation on the subject among the people is due to the stubborn refusal even to look at their demands with which their appeals have been met. I myself think that if there had been some concessions hitherto, or even now, it would tend to allay the irritation, and would also lead to calmer views of the question of voluntary emigration as betraying a kindly and honest attempt as far as possible to meet the people's request for more land in the place of their birth. To give an answer to the cry of ' more land' the direct and curt reply ' no land !' and that to men that can see every day they rise plenty of land where their forefathers and some of themselves lived and walked, is surely unwise—a way by no means to still that demand, but fitted rather to make it go beyond all bounds—the damming up of a stream to stay it for a time, but only to have it break forth in lawless courses. To do as at Park, in the very face of the demand ; and without even giving the people an opportunity of offering, to give the land asked to two of themselves that had enough already, seems to me still more unwise. The people use their eyes and cannot help seeing land—and good land too—that might be given. I have never so spoken to the people themselves, but I have to Mr Mackay himself. I did so at the relief committee, and I cannot help laying much of the blame of the irritated state of the people at the door of this obstinate refusal even to entertain their demands—demands moderate and reasonable enough at first, but which, being denied and unmet, threaten to go beyond all bounds. A little concession would have gone far to allay this irritation. Perhaps this refusal even to entertain proposals by the crofters, as in the Park case, may arise, and I believe has so arisen, from irritation on the other side. After the meeting at Lochs of the Commission I made some further inquiry about this matter of a threat referred to in Lady Matheson's letter, and I find that this had reference to a P.S. to the crofters' last letter, in which, I am sorry to say, some language that might be construed into -a threat, but which, I am given to understand, was not meant as such, was employed. This naturally irritated her Ladyship, but I do hope that both she and the chamberlain, to both whose kindly interest in the people otherwise I have to testify, will pass over this, and taking the needs and others of the people into consideration, will meet their seemingly reasonable demand for more land.

But Mr Mackay stated publicly that he had reasons for not giving more land, that they could not give the rent (though they never got the chance), and that he did not want to extend the crofter area. Yes ; but that is not quite the same as saying that there is no land. There is none he is willing to give to crofters, but that is a very different thing from saying that there is none, in fact this confession of his is an admission that there is, and so by his own evidence we must place his refusal of the request for more land not under the first objection that there is no land, but under the second, that it is neither profitable nor expedient to increase the number of crofters. But before noticing this second objection, I beg to submit to the consideration of the Commission some calculations based on Mr Mackay's own figures, showing that there is land that could, in part at least, if not in whole, meet the demand for the present:—

Parish of Uig
Crofters: 457
Cottars: 147
Total: 604
Acreage: 63829
Rent: £1532
Rent per acre: 5 3/4d

Tacksmen
Acreage: 39920
Rent: £1274, 15s
Rent per acre: 7½d

Forests
Acreage: 18747
Morsgail: 15872
Scaliscro: 2875
Rent: £1100

Total acreage: 122496
Total rent: £3907 15s

STOCK
Crofters (1881) 2385 cattle, 27 acres per head; 8097 sheep, 7 3/4 acre per head
Crofters (1882) 1989 cattle, 32 acres per head; 7489 sheep, 8 3/4 acre per head

Tacksmen (1881) 434 cattle, 92 acres per head; 4232 sheep, 9 acres per head
Tacksmen (1882) 333 cattle, 120 acres per head; 3406 sheep, 12 acres per head

ANALYSIS.
Four hundred and fifty-seven crofters have at present by this calculation 140 acres each between arable and hill, and putting crofters and cotters together about 100. But we must take into consideration the way in which the acreage of the crofter is made out. The land of the tacksmen and the forests laid aside are definitely known, then the remainder all accounted as the tenants', including peatland, &c. Tacks and forests would give the 147 cottars 400 acres each. Taking total of 122,496, it would give 604 lots of 200 acres each at say 45 = 43020, and 4900 for the shooting only, and leave the present rental 43920, or leaving forests and placing cottars on part of tacks would have say 150 lots of 200 acres each, leaving 9920 for large farms and the forests intact.

BARVAS
Crofters: 812
Cottars: 87
Total: 900
Acreage: 6654
Rent: £2330 4s 6d
Rent per acre: 7 1/4d.

Dell:
Acreage: 160
Galson Tack: 7290
Glebes &c: 940
Total rent: £315
Rent per acre: 10 3/4d.

STOCK
Crofters (1881): 549 horses, 3591 cattle, 24 acres per head; 14238 sheep, 5 acres per head
Crofters (1882): 580 horses, 3421 cattle, 24 acres per head; 13795 sheep, nearly 5 acres per head

1 cow and only 5 sheep on every 24 acres or 4 cows and 20 sheep on every 96 acres

Tacks (1881): 71 cattle, 102 acres per head, 1643 sheep, 4½ acres per head:
1 cow and 23 sheep on every 102 acres

Tacks (1882): 37 cattle, 197 acres per head, 1816 sheep, 3½ acres per head:
1 cow and 56 sheep on every 197 acres

ANALYSIS
This gives to the 812 crofters average lots of 94 acres and Galson 7290 would give lots of about 83 acres to the 87 squatters.

LOCHS

About 600 crofters and 250 cottars hold 55,601 acres at a rent of £2075 17s, 8 3/4d per acre rent.
Tacks: 60355 acres at £1176 rent, 4½d. per acre rent
Forests: 16,000 acres

STOCK
Have not got this but fancy that like rest it would show overstock. Have not got the exact number of crofters and cottars, but above approximate average acreage per crofter about 70, with cottars 60. Surely out of the 76,000 acres unoccupied by crofters land could be got to provide for some, if not all, the 250 above.

STORNOWAY

About 600 crofters and 250 cottars hold 44,747 acres at a rent of £2491, 1s. 6d., 1s 1½d. per acre rent.
Tacks: 16851 acres at £1102 rent, 1s. 3½d. rent per acre.

STOCK
Crofters (1881): 3074 cattle (14 acres per head), 5732 sheep (8 acres per head)
Crofters (1882): 2805 cattle (17 acres per head), 5880 sheep (7 3/4 acres per head)

Tacksmen (1881): 192 cattle (87 acres per head), 2047 sheep (8 acres per head)
Tacksmen (1882): 282 cattle (86 acres per head), 2007 sheep (8 acres per head).

That is the crofters have on their ground six times as many cattle and the same number of sheep as tacksmen, and horses besides, per acre.

TOTAL Acreage not under crofters, total, 159,163 acres.
Grand total about 400,000 acres, would give 100 acres to 4000 crofters.
Present average for 2881 on rent roll = 84¼ acres.
The 124,416 acres under tacks would give 155½ acres to 800 „
124 „ 1000 ,,
100 „ 1200 „
having forests intact.

[Summary omitted from transcript]
REMARKS.
Lots smaller on east side, and a larger cottar population, and also the price per acre, more especially in Stornoway. All this points to the advantage of a good seaboard and ready market for sea produce. But for the sea, evidently the east side would be worse off than west. Develop fishings more and you can have a class of cottars living entirely by the sea. Develop the fishings all over Lewis, and it will, with the land, easily bear its inhabitants at present. Overstocking evidently a weakness of the crofters. The number of horses again is simply ruinous and ridiculous. Surely more land could be given when little more than the half is held by the crofters.

Obj 2. And now I come to the second objection to give more land to the crofters, viz., that it is both unprofitable and inexpedient. (1.) It is unprofitable as they cannot pay the same rent for the land as the tacksman or sportsman.
Now, looking at the above statement of rent per acre in Lewis, the average per acre paid by the crofter is only 3/4 d. per acre less than that paid by the tacksman. My endeavour will be to show that apart from the question of the respective qualities of the land held by crofter and tacksman respectively—supposing them to be (a thing the crofters at any rate dispute) of equal quality, that the disadvantages under which the crofter labours will sufficiently account for this, and that the removal of these would be likely to place him, not only on a par with, but perhaps above the tacksman. I will but mention two of these disadvantages in Lewis—(1) the distance of the crofter from his hill pasture; (2) the restrictions under which he is placed with regard to its use.
(1) As to the first, while the tacksman's tack stretches continuously from his own door without interruption, right up from arable around his own door to the hill beyond, so that he can leave his milk cows about his door, or out in the hill as he likes, and can leave the most of his stock out in the hill summer and winter, thus getting the use of the Mil grazing without break by season or intervening lands; the crofter has to send his cattle out miles to reach the hill pasture, and of much that has been put down as his, and in regard to which he has been quoted as paying less rent per acre than the tacksman, he gets the use of it only for a limited time in the year, viz., a few months in summer (rule 6). Are there any such restrictions on the tacksman ? Has he not got the run of his hill all the year round, bringing his stock down to the low lands in severe weather, and that easily, as he has only to work them up and down on the same continuous stretch. Take Bemera, for instance, where they have to ferry the cattle to the hill pasture. Take Barvas, where the cattle go out some of them four miles or more in the morning, and back the same length at night, so that they look more like race horses or roadsters than like milch cows. Take the district of Point (Knock-Garrabost, Swordale, Aird, Portnaguirean, &c), beginning at Portnaguirean up to Knock. Their hill pasture or Airidhean Re from four to six miles out of Stornoway along the Lochs and Uig road, some of them having to send their cattle fifteen or sixteen miles along the high road to reach the summer pasture. The morning that the Rev. Hector Cameron, Back, and I drove over from Stornoway to attend the meeting of the Commission at Breasclete, we passed the Point sheep going out to the hill pasture, the ewes with lambs shorn at that early date, because they were going too far from home to give the men the opportunity of clipping them before they left for the east coast fishing. Let me picture the march of these sheep to their pasture. After leaving Garrabost six miles from Stornoway, they had first to pass the farm of Agnish on the right, then the farm of Holm on the left, on through Stornoway with its rich pasture parks, past the manor farm, past the rich parks outside the castle grounds held by Sellar of the Park, past the mill farm, through the town peat-lands, till at last they would reach their own hiR pasture after having traversed from twelve to fifteen miles of hard road. To me it is simply marvellous that those poor crofters manage to pay within 2d. per acre of what the tacksmen of the same parish pay whose pasture stretches from their very door, the park gradually passing into the hill. Place the crofters on the same footing and you are safe in saying they will pay penny for penny what the tacksmen pay, or even more.

(2) Take again the restrictions laid upon them. It was asked again and again of them why they had not availed themselves of the offer of leases contained in the rules and regulations of 1879. I would wish the Commissioners to study these and the conditions annexed. In the very offer of a lease the observance of
aR these rules and regulations is stated as a condition of the granting of the lease at all, and in article 25 it is distinctly stated that the lease, ipso facto, ceases in the event of the tenant contravening ' any of the foregoing conditions, rules, and regulations.' Now, at the outset, I always thought that conditions of lease were settled at the time of negotiating the same and not before, and that the conditions thereupon agreed were entered in the lease to be observed in the future, not before but after the granting of the lease ; but here the conditions must be fulfilled to the letter before the lease could be granted, the party granting to be the sole arbiter as to whether these previous conditions had been fulfilled or not. Passing this I come to the conditions themselves. I believe they are such as no tacksman would ever agree to nor landlord ask him to embody in his lease. Take rules and regulations 5, 6, 13, and 14; would any tacksman or ordinary farmer consent to have the estate appoint his herds ? or walk his own hill only on certain days mentioned by the estate ? or only burn and pull heather as allowed or directed by a gamekeeper ? I venture to say that tacks would be unmanageable and unprofitable on such conditions, and yet the crofter is handicapped with all these restrictions, and notwithstanding it all, he runs a neck to neck race with the tacksman. Remove these restrictions and disadvantages, let the crofter have equal advantages with the tacksman, and he will, I am bound to say, equal if not outstrip him. The case stands thus at present; while the tacksman has an uninterrupted run all the year round with restrictions not worth speaking of, the crofter has the connection between his home and hill pasture interrupted, sometimes by miles of intervening farms, pasture, or forest, and in many cases only gets the use of it for a few months in summer; besides that, in that same use he is restricted by regulations never imposed upon the tacksman.

(3) Add to this that the tacksman gets a good dwelling and steading built for him; the crofter, though in some instances he may have got improved lands, has never had anything done for him in the way of giving him a good house. In any case, even that of lease, he himself would have to build it.

(4) The tacksman occupies under a lease-tenure; the crofter is a tenant at will. So far in regard to the question of profitableness. Now as to the inexpediency of increasing the crofter area. I think that general statements in regard to the morality and physical quality of the Highlander, when true, are not irrelevant to the matter in hand; they show the desirability of nurturing amid their native hills such a sturdy race to form recruiting grounds for our civil and professional life, and that sheep and deer, however valuable, should not even from an economical point of view be allowed to take the place of sturdy Highlanders. Most landlords, I suppose, will grant that if it be profitable to give crofters land, it will likewise be expedient. By trying to suggest ways in which it would be profitable, I have thus so far tried to meet the landlord's objection on expediency, but many landlords, I am happy to say, are not content with having their own advantage made clear, they desire also that it be shown to be to fhe people's advantage. I believe many good and kindly landlords, and others interested in the crofters, object to increasing of the crofters' area, because they think it would be unprofitable for the crofters themselves, and that in their own interest they should all seek land and pastures across the sea. Now I must say that I think the giving of more land throughout our own Highlands would not only be to the profit of the landlord but to that of the crofter. One thing I missed very much in the crofters' evidence in Lewis was the evidence of some of the better-to-do among themselves, that it was possible not only to live but to live comfortably, and not only comfortably but profitably on the original unbroken lot. I spoke to some of them about this, but their answer was that even the unbroken lot was not so profitable as formerly, because the pasture land attached was overstocked by the subdivision of adjoining lots. This I saw so far as it went was unanswerable, viz., that these whole lots were more profitable when all in the township were also whole; but that did not satisfy me that, even still amidst all the overcrowding, they are not to this day profitable. I believe it is so, though it may not long be so. This I am sure of, that if the townships were thinned out to the original allotment, say of 58-61, and those thinned out provided for by land within the kingdom or across the sea, the crofter population remaining on the old and transplanted to the new under the new conditions would be comfortable and profitable. In my opinion, under new conditions it would be profitable and expedient to landlord and tenant alike to extend the area of the present crofter population by thinning out the overcrowded townships to their proper number, and providing the cottars and those of the crofters thinned out with land under strict rules against squatting (except at seaports). One other thing I must in justice say, if the crofters are to get more land they must undertake to manage their lands better and have better stock. This I have no doubt they would do under better conditions and encouragements. The old system of rigs could be abolished except in very wet places. They should learn to sow both com and potatoes more thinly, and not as at present sow corn as if they were feeding hens, and plant potatoes as if they were, dibbling beans. I have no doubt but that restricted holdings of arable land gave rise to this, the poor man thinking that the more he put in the more he would take out. If more land were granted this would cease. Again, as to stock, they must learn to keep fewer and of better breed. At present, more in Skye I think than in Lewis, they cross and cross and cross till the result is an animal that would almost compete for one of Darwin's originals. The order of development has been as it were reversed. The corn and potato seed should in the same way be renewed periodically. It is really wild oats that they grow in some places, and the potato failure last year was due, I believe, to the exhaustion of the potatoes more than to anything else. I would expect this and much else to pass away under a liberal and wise readjustment of the land and its laws.

II. Emigration.—But what are you to do with the surplus, supposing that there be not land enough within Lewis to give all a due share, or supposing there be not a surplus now, what will you do with the surplus of future years ? Every sensible man must answer ' emigration ' as one of the outlets. The only two points in regard to this on which any difference can be are (a) the place, (b) the time.

(a) Place.—When emigration is spoken of, why are America and the colonies alone thought of ? Surely, before peopling other lands we should people our own and exhaust its resources. Why not try migration to other parts of the Highlands. Though the population in Lewis has increased so much, the population of the Highlands as a whole has decreased. There are large tracts on the mainland, once occupied by stalwart Highlanders, now occupied by sheep and deer. Why not transplant a number of sturdy Lewis m e n into those parts. In other words, could not the present population of the Highlands be so distributed over its surface as to avoid the necessity of emigration to foreign lands, and conserve for our own nation so much strong intellectual and moral fibre. I think that at least it could be tried, and that before the other is finally resorted to, for that the other must come sooner or later is certain, but then this leads to the second question of—

(b) The time.—Is any wholesale emigration across seas expedient at present ? (And in regard to this I must say that in Lewis it is something on a large scale that is needed.) I give the Commission my unbiassed view of the matter. I believe we are on the eve of a large voluntary emigration, but not till the land question at home is settled, and there is afforded to the people bona fide proof that an honest attempt has been made to give them land in the place of their birth, and that yet there is no place for them. Let what of land can be given them at home be given them. This would improve their circumstances, lead them to attend more to their children's education, as also to give them some support when leaving. All these things combined—allayed irritation, improved circumstances, better education—would lead to a stream of voluntary emigration that would of itself keep down the pressure, and gradually thin out the Highlands. How do matters stand, in fact, at present ? Is it not as you rise in the social scale that you find the willingness to emigrate ? The possession of education and capital account for this. The example of tacksmen's, and merchants', and gentlemen's sons has been quoted to the crofters again and again. Do those quoting such examples not see that it works the other way—that the answer it suggests logically is : Raise the crofters by bettering their condition, enabling them to educate and support their sons somewhat as those quoted to them are able to do, and then these sons will emigrate of themselves ? Do not those examples cited go against anything like a wholesale emigration at present till you have first raised the crofter in the social scale by bettering his circumstances in his own land, and then his sons and daughters, having got education, will emigrate, and will not be afraid as at present of leaving him behind. I myself, I may say, in Stomoway here, and a good deal in connection with my own congregation, come in direct contact with the present stream of emigration. Sons of the better crofters come into town to shop or other, and not till they have got themselves brushed up in connection with our Young Men's Mutual Improvement Societies and such like institutions do they venture across sea ; but when at last they do go, it is to succeed. But send a poor ignorant crofter or crofter's family out, and the chances are ten to one that they will be as poor beyond seas as at home. [And here I may say that I do not agree with the view of emigration in families. I doubt if it has succeeded in fact. The only result has been the founding of Celtic colonies beyond the sea, retaining and perpetuating there all those social defects that mark the race in their native land. Isolate the Celt, cut him clean off from all his former associations, and he makes a good colonist. The old people carry with them the old habits, the unthriftiness, the untidiness, &c.; but let the young people go forth, and they will begin under new conditions a better mode of living.] Connect this with what I have said about the original crofters on undivided crofts as being well off. It is from the homes of these that the present stream of emigration issues. Increase the number of these by bettering the home condition of the whole crofter population, and you have a stream of voluntary emigration large enough to drain off any future surplus of population. As a preliminary to all this, you must extend the crofter area.

III. Development of the Fishing Industry.—The real riches of the Lewis lie in the sea around. my ideas on this point correspond with those on emigration.
In the present undeveloped state of the fishing, I fear that you could not have a class without land at all, entirely closed in to the sea for their livelihood, but the clear tendency of things is in that way. I look for the formation of such in time, and indeed I may say that some of the people themselves are awakening to the fact that their east coast friends, who have no land at all, but who are dependent on the sea altogether, are better off than themselves, who have their attention divided between sea and land. I heard one man advocate the giving up of the sea altogether, and their getting as much land as would keep them without being necessitated to go to sea at all. This is mere nonsense, if it be not laziness. The matter should be reversed, and then it would leave more land for those that could give their undivided time to it. The statistics given above will show that the holdings on the east side of the island (the fishing side) are smaller than on the west (the more agricultural side). my difficulty is about the possibility and desirability of establishing such colonies of fishermen at once. I do not think it would be wise at present, except on a very small scale ; but develop the fishing facilities by harbours and more direct communication with the markets in the south, along with the abolishing of the truck and credit system, and I believe that in the course of time there will grow up around the fishing harbours a class of fishermen dependent almost, if not altogether, on the sea fishing.

Temperance.—One gentleman who read a paper before you, among other things sneered at her Ladyship's efforts on behalf of temperance. Lady Matheson has done noble service in this cause, for which all that desire the good of their fellow creatures are grateful. Though I differ from Mr Mackay, and I suppose from her Ladyship too on the land question, still I hope to do so in a gentlemanly way, and I seek, while fearlessly stating my own views on the matter, and while advocating certain reforms and concessions, ever to do justice to the kindly interest in the people's welfare both of Mr Mackay and her Ladyship in this and in other respects. It is often said of Highlanders that they are too fond of whisky. Now I am not going to defend them in the quantity they drink. They would in opinion be better and richer if they drank none at all; but this I say, that they drink less—Lewis at least—in proportion than elsewhere. Taking the Lewis drink bill at £15,000 per annum, you have about 12s. 6d. per head of population. Taking Scotland as a whole, you have about £ 3 or above. In the Point district, you have a Total Abstinence Society 1000 strong, and in Back one of about 300, and all over the island there are eleven such societies in all. Excess in drink does not lie at the root of their poverty, though certainly £15,000 is too large a sum, but into this total must be thrown the consumption by strangers in Stornoway. Temperance sentiment and practice are gaining fast hold in the Highlands, but not till the supply be stopped will the demand entirely cease. Abolition is the real cure. Again, certain quarters we have read sneers about the Free Church and the Sustentation Fund. If Free Church ministers were to consult their own pockets, as it is so often sneered they do, they would advocate the emigration of all the poorer crofters to-morrow, for by the working of the surplus fund of the church, the fewer you have of non-contributing adherents the likelier you are to get the surplus. But again the Sustentation Fund over the whole island is only about £1100. Of that £400 is contributed by the two Stornoway congregations, leaving only £700 to be contributed by the remaining 22,000. These two charges are the only self-supporting ones in the island, and their ministers are the only ones that have supplements. Of the eleven congregations subscribing, only one (my own) gives up to 6s. per adherent, four come up to 4s., the remaining six being all under 4s. per adherent, above eighteen years. This shows that our Sustentation Fund is not worth speaking of, but if any one still persists in talking of the maintenance of our church by the people as a burden, I have another answer for him, and that is disestablishment, or at least disendowment. The Free Church is notoriously, as to adherentship, the church of the people of the Highlands, and either of two things should happen if the maintenance of the church be too great a burden for the people, either that the endowments of the present Established Church be given to the Free so as to relieve the people of the burden of sustentation, or' else better still, give them to neither church, but to the people to enable them to meet their school and poor rate fees, and let the people maintain for themselves which church they want. This to my mind would be part solution at least of the question of heavy taxation in the Highlands. This would go far to give the free education advocated by one witness. One thing more, I refer to the relation of the crofter to the game and its laws. I do not think that the giving of lands to the crofters would interfere really with game, either grouse or deer. The small tenants would willingly leave the upper reaches and higher hills to the deer. The extent of deer forest would not be so great, and such rents might not be got, but I would venture to say, the sport would be truer and better ; and as in the case of Uig, rent got would swell the total up to the present figure. For grouse shooting, I am not sure but that the hills of small tenants are as valuable if not more so than those of tacksmen. In speaking to a friend on this very point, viz., the giving up to small tenants of a tack (Gress farm) I said, 'But what of the shooting rents ?' ' Why,' he said,' that would be as before if not better. Mr Platt, the shooting tenant of Park, told my brother that the crofters' part of the hill was 50 per cent, better shooting than that of the tacksmen.' I mentioned this to an ex-gamekeeper, and he said it was quite true, that the tacksmen were greater heather burners than the crofters, and that that accounted for the difference. This same gamekeeper gave it as his opinion in regard to the scarcity of salmon in a river, that in former times when the people Lived on its banks, and when there were no game laws, it used to be swarming with nsh, so that the people actually lived during winter on the salted salmon, and that this scarcity was due to over preservation. Formerly the boys and others of the adjoining hamlet by their continual rod-fishing kept down the black trout, whereas now, all fishing whatsoever being prohibited, the trout had got so numerous that they ate up the salmon spawn. I do not pronounce upon these two opinions, but merely give them as they may be of interest to the Commissioners in throwing light upon the relation of the crofters to game, as tending to show that the extension of the crofter area, and the restoring of them to their old townships, so far from spoiling the game, might only restore it to its former excellence.

Concluding statement
I fear I have been too long, but I would now conclude by summing up suggested remedies:—
1. A fixed tenure of some sort, either feu or lease—anything to secure from arbitrary eviction, or even the fear of it, and to give to the crofter the security not only arising from the benevolent intention and treatment of a kindly landlord or factor, but made sure by law. As to the power of eviction at wilt, I believe that this power, though in recent times at least rarely carried out, has nevertheless up to very recent date been used as a sort of rod over the crofter's head te keep in order. Ministers (a course of conduct I dislike and condemn) sometimes let calls, that they have no intention of ultimately accepting, go on just in order to stir their own people up to some point of duty—put on the screw, in other words—and just so I have known of factors (some have said it to myself) that in warning tenants had no intention of ultimately evicting them, but only of teaching them a lesson of submission. And in cases even where no such steps, or even threats, have been employed, the knowledge that factors and landlords have such power operates unconsciously in the minds of the people, destroying in many cases their independence of character and freedom of action, and that, it may be, from no fault of either landlord or tenant or any abuse of their power, but merely from the fact that such power is theirs ; a state of things not due so much to men as to a system. For, again, there may be a kindly factor or benevolent landlord under whose administration there is a practical guarantee against arbitrary eviction ; but that is only as long as he lives or holds the estate. Another may succeed of quite an opposite character, and the law being still unchanged, he can evict at pleasure. Now, mark you, in the present state of the law with tenancy at will, though under their present factor or proprietor the people are secure from eviction, yet the possibility of his being succeeded by an altogether different man deters the people from availing themselves of the present. You will notice how this operates against even a benevolent proprietor or kindly factor. Benevolence or kindliness forms no tenure or security. Those that have read Uncle Tom's Cabin
will remember a case in point. St Clair was the kindliest of masters, and under him his slaves enjoyed practical freedom, but he never gave them a legal title to their freedom, so that, the law being unchanged, when he died, they, having no legal standing, were sold into slavery—a thing he never would have done, but which the system permitted and legalised. In this whole matter I have advocated, and still do, the raising of it above and the dissociating it from personalities or persons. Sir James was the kindest of landlords and the most benevolent of men, and yet under his proprietorship things were done that were far from the right thing. So now what the people need is a change from this system of tenancy at will to something like a legal title to tenancy or possession short or long, but to be known and fixed. This would do away with that constant feeling of abject subjection which under the present system confessedly exists in the crofter's mind. It is not a question of personal rule, good or bad, but of a system. I could enter here into the question of the people's interest in the land. Suffice it to say that it seems to m e that the old clan system under which the people seem to have had equal rights to, or at least interest in the land with the clan head or chief, came to be superseded by the feudal, which exists to this day, whereby both right and interest were all vested in the feudal lord or proprietor, who drew his title, not now from the people but from the sovereign. All I plead for now is not perhaps the full recognition of this, which might lead to injury to those who have no blame in the matter, and have acquired by purchase and otherwise a right and title to the property, but such a recognition as would give legal security against removal at will.

2. Help and encouragement in conducting improvements, in stocking land, and in building houses ; in other words, the compensation for improvements of which we have heard so much. I care not whether the help come in way of payment before or after, viz., by way of loan or compensation. [As I have already said, to my mind, if Sir James had gone on these Hues his money on improvements would have been better laid out.] The only question is, who are the parties to advance the money ? Three parties come before my mind:
(1) Landlord.—Landlords might be found to do it, as also to pay the tenants on leaving for any additional value that their labour and improvements might have brought into the land, though in order to encourage the landlord as well as the crofter, in case of new land, if the landlord gave it this might be left to him as reward. (2) Government might advance money to crofters to enable them to improve and stock land, or they might buy up land in order to let or sell it out in suitable lots to settlers. (3) Capitalists.—I mean by this especially those that have faith in the crofters' power of repayment and improvement. If landlords have not faith enough in the industry and power of the crofter to venture the experiment, then surely those who advocate the giving of more land to the people, and think that it would pay to do so, should be prepared to bear the risk of carrying out their views by combining to advance the needful, or by purchasing land und allotting it.

3. More land. But where is the land to come from ? I am sure that many landlords will of their own accord give such ; but though by some the proposal may be considered a very radical one indeed, I myself would advocate on this, the Introduction of the principle embodied in our Railway Bills, viz., that of
public necessity—that, as in the case of railways, & c , if a community or company could make out a preamble (a) that there was land to be got; and (b) that
they could work it so as to pay, they could approach Parliament and have the land given them at a valuation.
4. Voluntary emigration, as following migration and education.
5. The development of the fishing industry, by the building of harbours and breakwaters.
6. The making of squatting and subdivision illegal This should not be left to individual landlords to enforce, but should be enforced by law. And this could be done more efficiently, more easily, and with least hardship when accompanied by legislation that would provide land for those wanting it.

Appendix XLII

2010-08-02T17:47:00.001+01:00

STATEMENT by JOHN BLACK, Esq., Sheriff-Substitute, Stornoway.
SHERIFF'S CHAMBERS, STORNOWAY, Esq., Sheriff-
15th May 1883.

In view of the Royal Commissioners visiting this island soon, I take leave to bring under their notice some usages, &c , connected with our fishing industry well worthy of examination, calculated as these are to cripple the industry not a little.

The Lews population, amounting to 26,000 or so, is a crofter population, with the exception of 3500 or so (mostly resident in Stornoway) ; and as Lews crofters are also fishermen (as a rule), and their living is mainly got out of the sea, it seems eminently desirable to remove all removable impediments in the way of the people making the most of the golden girdle that surrounds their island.

The usages, & c , I refer to are these :—

I. The system of fixing many months in advance the prices to be paid for the fish that may be caught.

In Yarmouth and other places in the south, the fishermen fish for herrings on their own account, and the fish when landed are sold to curers at the market price of the day (ascertained in some places—Yarmouth, for example— by the fish being sold by auction). In the Lews again, and other places in Scotland, the usual practice is for the crew to be, months before the commencement of the fishing season, engaged by a curer to fish for him for the season, the price to be received by the crew for the fish cured being paid at the outset (in the case of herrings at so much per cran, say 20s.). These prices are in addition to the ' bounty' noticed below. This fixing of the prices many months in advance tends, I imagine, to reduce the average profit to the fisherman, as the curer, in fixing the prices; will be anxious to keep himself safe. Moreover, so far as the curer is concerned, the system tends sensibly to increase the gambling element in the industry. The evils just noticed are perhaps unavoidable in small stations, where the absence of keen competition might place the fishermen at the mercy of a small number of curers. But at all large stations, like Stornoway, the evils seem quite avoidable. Good might be done if, after inquiry, this were pointed out by the Commissioners in their Report.

II. The Bounty System
When a curer engages a crew to fish for him during the season, he engages to pay them so much in name of 'bounty' (say from £20 to £50 in the case of herring fishing). This bounty is in addition to the stipulated price of the fish. The crew receive the bounty long before the fish is caught, and it remains their property whether the fish caught be few or many. It is alleged by critics of the system that this diminishes the zeal of the fishermen, aye, if dog-fish are numerous, or if the weather be unpromising, the fishermen are tempted to remain at home, under circumstances that would not keep them on shore but for their having received the bounty. The fish-curers, I believe, are practically unanimous in disliking the system, which entails a heavy burden on them. Attempts to terminate it by a mutual agreement to witldiold bounties have failed through the disloyalty of individual curers. The hands of honest curers might be strengthened in their efforts to put an end to bounty giving if, after inquiry, the Commissioners were to condemn the system.

III. The Truck System
Our ling and cod fishing, as distinguished from the herring fishing, is mostly in the hands of local curers, who keep shops, in which they sell clothing, boots and shoes, nshing gear, pots and pans, groceries, provisions, &c. The boat from which a crew fish for a local curer has, with the appurtenances, been sold by the curer to the crew on credit, the crew undertaking to pay for it when able, the boat to become the property of the crew when fully paid for. During the progress of the nshing season each of the crew purchases in the curer's shop, on credit, the meal, clothing, and other necessaries required for himself and his family. A settlement takes place at the end of the season, i.e., the fishermen are credited with the price of the fish delivered by them to the curer, and debited with the price of their purchases. Money may or may not pass on the occasion, and a 'balance' is struck. The prices charged against the crew seem to be regulated by the conscience of the curer, for although the two parties have many disputes, resulting sometimes in litigation in the Sheriff Court here, it is a rare occurrence for the fishermen to question the fairness of the prices charged. As matter of fact, the prices are considerably higher than the usual prices. For example, a boll of meal, for which the curer might charge another customer 20s., would be charged 24s. when sold on credit to the crew. And the risk of nonpayment is so great, that most mainland shopkeepers would probably consider the prices charged against the crew to be much too low. In like manner, the conscience of the curer largely regulates the terms of his contract with his debtors the crew, and ill-natured people aUege that accordingly the curer prefers that the crew should not be quite ' clear' with him, and that their boats should not be ' free.' In the case of Murray v. Macleod and others, decided in 1878 by m y predecessor Sheriff Spittal, in the Sheriff Court here, a fish-curer sued a crew on what the curer called a running agreement, in the shape of a missive addressed by the crew to the curer, by which the crew bound themselves to fish herrings for the curer 'until
we shall be clear of your debt, on the east coast, for 2s. less per cran than current prices given to free boats.' And even working under such a contract the curer probably found his transactions with the crew anything but profitable. One result of the truck system is as curious as it is injurious to the fisherman, who, with such fatal facility gets goods from his employer on credit; for even if the fisherman chances to have the means to buy with cash, somehow he readily yields to the temptation to buy on credit, and so he pays, say 20 per cent, more for his goods than he need do. Another result of the case with which they thus obtain credit is that, in the vast majority of cases, the crews are in a state of chronic indebtedness to the curer, and fish for him, year after year, with little prospect of ever being ' free.' And the fisherman, long accustomed to get this accommodation —trained as it were to walk on crutches,—fancies probably that he never would learn to walk without them. As to the fish-curcr again, he probably believes that the fishermen are too poor, and ignorant, and spiritless, to give him a chance of getting them to fish for him unless he will supply the needs of themselves and their families by advances either in money or in kind, and that he may as well do it in kind as in money, and thus secure the merchant's profit, the money, if paid to the fisherman, being wanted for immediate use. His crews are largely indebted to him, and encouraged by occasional gains in exceptionally good seasons, or moved by mere feelings of humanity, he continues to make advances, dreaming that some big prize will come some day, and enable him to recoup himself for all the lottery tickets he has paid for in the game of hazard, which is his calling. The big prize never comes, and the impoverished curer must be content, sooner or later, to write off as a bad debt the greater part of the many, many thousands of pounds representing the total indebtedness of the fishermen.

It is hard to say which victim of this advance system is more to be pitied, —the curer, whose capital is hopelessly sunk in advances to the crews, and who must go on ' throwing good money after bad/ unless prepared to throw up the whole business as a bad job ; or the fisherman, who goes through life the serf of the curer, burdened with a load of debt of which he can hardly hope to get rid, a load which heavily weights the honest man in the race of life, and is a sore temptation to the m a n of weak principles to act a dishonourable part towards his employer.

It seems plain that the termination of the truck system would remove a part only of the evil—perhaps only a small part. But this is no reason why the truck system, if in itself mischievous, should not be attacked. I take leave humbly to submit, for the consideration of the Commissioners, whether, after inquiry, they should not report that the system ought to be rendered illegal by some such statutory enactment as that contained in sec. 6 of the Truck Act, 1 & 2 Will. IV. c. 37.

IV. The combination of croft work with fishing As already mentioned, the Lews crofter is usually a fisherman. But the claims of his croft come into sharp collision with those of his boat. Our herring fishing is in spring, when the crofter is engaged in the cultivation of his crop. And the attractions of the croft, I imagine, tend to withdraw the crofter's affections from the sea, and so to deaden his energies as a fisherman. Of the vast and ever-increasing quantities of herrings caught in the seas that surround our island, the great majority are caught by strangers. I submit it for the consideration of the Commissioners, whether it would not be better and more profitable for all concerned if the Lews fishermen, like their more successful brethren of the east coast, would confine themselves to fishing, limiting their territorial possessions, say to a house and garden with grass for a cow, and give up the crofts for the (greatly-needed) enlargement of adjoining crofts, to be occupied by crofters pure and simple. The expression of an opinion by the Commissioners in this sense would encourage those aiming at such a reform.

V. Defective harbour accommodation.
Except at Stomoway, there is no proper harbour in the island. Thanks to the enlightened views of the Fishing Board, and to the benevolence of Sir James Matheson's representatives, the harbour at Ness, our most important station for the cod and ling fishing, is being greatly improved, but there are other points on our coast where harbours for fishing boats are a great desideratum Carlorray, for example, and Valtos, and Bayble ; and the hands of the Fishery Board might be strengthened if this were indicated by the Commissioners.

With reference to the various points I have noticed—particularly the truck system—I may be permitted to suggest that the Commissioners, while in this island, should examine (1) one or two of the leading local curers ; (2) one or two of the leading curers who come to the island from other parts (England and the east coast of Scotland) ; (3) some of the crofter-fishermen, especially Ness men ; (4) Mr Mackay (Lady Matheson's factor) ; and (5) one of the Stornoway bank agents, say Mr Macleod, who was at one time a fish-curer himself.

Our seas team with fish, the value of which might be indefinitely increased to our islanders ; and, with all their faults, a lovable race those islanders are, and well worth careful conservation. I do not believe that legislation can do much to help them ; but it would be useful if a body like the Royal Commissioners were to draw attention to removable delects, and hint to the crofter the urgent need of industry, energy, and self-reliance for himself, and of education for his children.

JOHN BLACK.

Appendix XLI

2010-08-02T17:46:00.017+01:00

STATEMENT by WILLIAM MACKAY, Esq., Chamberlain of Lews.

CHAMBERLAIN'S OFFICE,
STORNOWAY, 25th September 1883.

With reference to the evidence laid before the Royal Commissioners while in the island of Lews, I have already made some statements before you in each of the four parishes in the island, and would now respectfully beg to submit the following remarks in the shape of answers or explanations of statements made by certain delegates.

Murdo MacLean, delegate from Yaltos in the parish of Uig, stated that the statute labour was commuted in 1850 to a charge of 5s. This labour was commuted into a money payment long before 1844 ; but it was optional to the crofter to perform one week's labour or make a payment of 5s. in lieu thereof. He further stated that ' about 1827 the township was deprived of some islands, and a few years before that of moorland pasture, and for that deprivation they got an abatement of £40 of rent.' In the year 1823 the rental of the township of Yaltos was £239, 13s., and in 1828 the rent was .£169,10s., so that, if deprived of moorlands within that period, the crofters must have got a deduction of £70, 3s. The rental of this township in 1828, as already stated, was £169, 10s., and now (1883) it is only £159, Is., and the marches and boundaries are the same to-day as they were in 1844. and probably may be the same as they were in 1828. I merely refer to this to show that no dependence can be put on statistics or figures given by such delegates as Mr MacLean, who had merely hearsay for his statements.

He further stated that ' the people had no inducement to improve their dwellings. I consider they had every inducement to do so, when, by the rules of the estate and the conditions on which the tenants held their crofts, they are secured, in the event of being removed at the expiry of a lease, or otherwise quitting their crofts during the currency of a lease, in full meliorations for their houses, according to the valuation of parties mutually chosen, providing the house was not used both as a dwelling-house and byre, and that the smoke was allowed to escape by a chimney or other opening on the roof. It is not correct, as stated by Mr MacLean, that ' a number of people were evicted from Callanish about 32 years ago, and that in recent years there had been cases of arbitrary eviction at Crolovick. Grievous complaints were made against two crofters in Crolovick by their neighbours; and, after inquiry, these complaints being ascertained to be well founded, they were shifted to another township.

Norman Morison, delegate from Brenish, is reported to have said that about fifty years ago there were between 12 and 16 families in Brenish, and now there were 43, of whom 29 were on the rent roll.' The fact is that fifty years ago there were 25 crofters on the rent-roll in this township, and now there are 29, but there are other 15 families as squatters or sub-tenants, so that the overcrowding here has arisen entirely from the crofters themselves subdividing their crofts, and not from families from other townships thrown in among them. There was no increase of rent on this township since 1844, except interest on outlay by the proprietor on improvements and fencing. The rental now is £99, 6s., and the arrears outstanding at 31st December last were £188, 6s. 2d.

Angus Macarthur, delegate from Kirkibost, in the island of Bernera, stated that' they wanted an island which used to go with Kirkibost, but they could not get it.' On the 5th June, at Uig, and again on the 11th June, at Stomoway, I gave some particulars regarding the township of Kirkibost, and have only to add that these crofters were removed from Bosta to Kirkibost at their own urgent request, and were never summoned to remove ; that they did not consider the rent high, and would have given more for it if asked. There was no island attached to Kirkibost, and I never heard of such, nor did any of the crofters, at the time of negotiating for the exchange from Bosta to Kirkibost, ask for or say anything about an island. The crofters of this township got as much land as they could desire, and a lease of their holdings which provides for compensation for houses and other improvements. Still, their houses are nothing better than other houses in the island, nor are they in better circumstances than those who have no written leases.

George Macaulay. delegate from Hacklete, in the island of Bemera, said ' the people could never rise out of poverty, but would sink deeper into it unless their rents were reduced and more land given to them.' The crofters of this township were formerly in the adjoining township of Croir, in the same island. There were eight crofters in Croir, paying a rent of £33, 13s., and seven cottars or sub-tenants. All these petitioned to be removed to the farm of Hacklete when it was out of lease in 1880. Accordingly, they did remove to Hacklete, but considered the place too large for fifteen crofters. Consequently, there were five cottars taken from Tobson, in Bernera, and placed with the fifteen from Croir in Hacklete. The rent they now pay is the same as was paid by the former tacksman (£85, 8s.). They have also the privilege of sending their cattle and sheep to the Bernera summer sheilings or grazings on the mainland of the Lews island, which the former tacksman had not, though he paid as high a rent as the crofters now do. Still, if this delegate represents correctly the views of the crofters of this township, they now think they have not sufficient land, and that they are too highly rented, though they are unable to cultivate the whole of the arable land they have got. I think the case of this township, and that of Kirkibost already referred to, goes far to show that crofters who are also fishermen cannot pay the same rent for the same area that a tacksman can do, and that leases will not, in Lews at least, work out the marvellous improvements many ascribe to them.

Murdo Macdonald, delegate from Tobson, stated that' the people of Tobson wished to get the lands of Bosta, which were vacated.' But Bosta was not vacated, but given up in exchange for Kirkibost; and the main reason for making the exchange was that the peats were exhausted in Bosta, and that the crofters had consumed as fuel nearly the whole surface of their pasture lands, and therefore the place had become unfit for crofters. Macdonald further stated that' the hill pasture taken from them was added to the deer forest. It was eleven years ago that occurred.' There were no pasture lands taken from this township, or from Bernera eleven years ago and added to the deer forest; but the crofters of Bernera were shifted from their summer sheilings at Bealach-eaulan to the farm of Earshader, which farm is on the opposite shore of the island of Bernera, and therefore, nearer and more convenient for the crofters than their former sheilings, wliich were upwards of twelve miles from Bernera; and in going to and returning from their former sheilings or grazings they had to pass through the farm of Earshader with their stock. This delegate says ' they put up the dyke referred to in the course of a winter and spring,' whereas the dyke was put up in less than ten days.

The delegate from Borrowston stated that' fifty-five years ago there were 'only five crofters in the place, paying a rent of £42; now there are fifteen, and the rent was £61.' The fact is, that fifty-five years ago, in 1828, there were fourteen crofters in this township paying a rent Of £46, 4s. At this date there are sixteen crofters paying a rent of £48, 19s., showing a rise of only £2, 15s. in fifty-five years. The crofters of this township are not prevented from taking sea-ware from the shores of Limeshader, as was said by this delegate ; and there is no moss that could be used for fuel in Limeshader.

The delegate from Kerrivick stated that ' seven crofts had, since Sir James Matheson got the estate, been divided into fifteen, and besides there were five squatters, or families within the land. There were eight crofters in this township in 1844. There were no crofters or tenants from any other township placed there ; but the eight crofters subdivided their crofts amongst their sons and sons-in-law; so that there are now fourteen families on the eight crofts, besides other four families who have no lands. It was perfectly well known to those crofters that the subdivision of crofts was contrary to the rules of the estate, but they did so in this township in particular in defiance of factor and ground officer, as everything within their power was done to prevent it.

Murdo Mackay, delegate from Lionel, Ness, stated that' twelve or thirteen years ago, in the time of Munro, they had to build a dyke between the moor and the tack of Galson, and that the crofters did the whole work.' The proprietor erected the south and north march fences on the farm of Galson; and in 1871 a portion of mil pasture about six square miles was cut off the farm and given to the adjoining crofters. Between this hill pasture and the farm of Galson there was an old turf march fence known as the blackdyke, which the crofters undertook to repair on their getting this pasture, and thereafter to uphold the one-half of it, and the proprietor or tacksman of Galson to uphold the other half. This has accordingly been done, and the upholding costs the crofters 6d. each, and the proprietor pays an equal sum to that contributed by the crofters towards the upholding of this dyke, and both sums paid to the crofters' herd, who undertakes to uphold the fence, and this enables the herd to take less wages from the crofters for his herding than he otherwise would do had he not the upholding of the fence.

George Mackenzie, delegate from Laxay. stated at Keose that'Mr Mackay, the present chamberlain, had committed very gross injustice upon a blind and helpless sister of the delegate's, by cruelly turning her out of her croft, although she was not in arrear, and had kept her croft in order.' The woman here referred to was a squatter or sub-tenant on Roderick Ferguson's croft. I never deprived her of the portion of the croft she held from Ferguson; but Ferguson seeing that she brought a nephew—a son of the delegate's, to live with her; and that the nephew was likely to get married, he (Ferguson) deprived her of the portion of his croft which she held from him, for this reason that she was unable to pay the rent and had applied for parochial relief, but more particularly for fear that if the nephew was to get married and be on the croft, he (Ferguson) would never come into possession of the whole of his croft. This was perfectly well known to George Mackenzie when he made his statement, and that I never deprived his sister of the lands she held from Ferguson.

It was stated by some of the delegates at Keose that application was made by the crofters to Lady Matheson for the farm of Park or for part of it. Lady Matheson's first impulse and inclination was to put part of Park under crofters, even should it be at less rent than she could otherwise obtain; but after full consideration and consultation with friends and other proprietors she resolved not to do so for the following reasons :—

1st, That under present circumstances it would not be advisable to increase the crofter area in Lews until something is done to prevent the possibility of subdivision of crofts, which can only be done by having free emigration, and making subdivision of crofts punishable as a crime or misdemeanour.

2nd, No part of Park is well adapted for small crofters. With the exception of about thirty acres in Loch-shell, a plough cannot be used in the remainder of Park. What land there is fit for cultivation with the spade is situated at the heads of arms of the sea or lochs extending for some miles landwards ; and placing crofters at the heads of these lochs they would be too far from the fishing ground. Many years ago there were crofters in some parts of Park, and it has been said that for this reason (that is, that they could not prosecute the fishing), they had to be removed to other parts of the island.

3rd, Should such parts of Park as some may think suitable be put under crofters, the number thus accommodated would not be ' a drop in the bucket' in the way of relieving the overcrowding of crofters in the parish of Lochs.

4th, To increase the crofter area by placing crofters in Park would only increase taxation, poverty, and pauperism, and necessitate additional schools in a parish where there are twelve schools already with only an assessable rental of £4129. And lastly, the parties applying for Park are unable to build anything like decent houses, reclaim the land by trenching, or even to stock the land.

With regard to the evidence submitted at Stornoway, the delegates there made misstatements like the other delegates throughout the island, particularly as to rents, number of crofters now and in former years, lands taken from them, and rents raised, &c. I shall only refer to a few of them.

Roderick Mackenzie, Coll, stated that ' when the estate was purchased by Sir James Matheson four were put into their township, and when the township of Garrie-gorm was cleared four were put in upon Coll.' When Sir James Matheson purchased the estate, there were no crofters in Garrie-gorm. nor for many years before then. In 1844 there were forty-six families in Coll, and though no crofter was put there from another township, there are now eighty-nine families—all through squatting and subdivision of crofts. This township was lotted and rented in 1849, and there has been no change in the boundaries since then.

Roderick MacSween, Steinish, stated that' the proprietor deprived them of 120 acres of agricultural ground and moorland pasture; that the previous rent was £30, 17s., whereas it was now £41.' About 50 acres of waste land, from which the surface had been removed, and therefore of no use for pasture, was partly reclaimed and enclosed, and let to two tenants, at .£13, 6s. The other twelve tenants in this township are paying the same rent now as they did in 1844. The rent of the croft held by this same delegate is the same to-day as it was in 1829.

I have already referred to what this delegate says in regard to the want of a road to the burying-ground at Eye. It is a fact that there is a public road to the burying-ground, therefore he had no ground of complaint on this head.

With reference to the statements made regarding a quay at Bayble, ' tha the clerk of works on the estate had removed stones from this quay.' This quay or slip was originally built by the late Sir James Matheson. He never exacted dues for it. Mr Methuen, fish-curer, may have exacted £1 from each boat as was stated by some of the delegates; but if he did so, it is more than likely residence, that he extended, enlarged, or repaired the original quay. I can state for fact, from m y own personal knowledge, that this quay was almost wholly swept away by the sea, many years before the clerk of works removed a stone from it; and further, that the crofters themselves had taken stones from this quay for building their houses.

The Rev. Angus Maciver, minister of Uig, stated at Stomoway that' the crofters rents in the Lews had been doubled since 1843.' This is not the case, or anything like it. In my former statement, submitted to the Commissioners at Stornoway, I showed that the land rental in 1844 was £10,256, and in 1883 £12,713, being only an increase of £2457 in thirty-nine years—principally made up by interest on improvements and farmhouses, and new townships formed from reclaimed land. Of this increase, £520 is on the manor farm and castle grounds alone. It is therefore clear that Mr Maciver is in error in maintaining that the crofters' rents have been doubled since 1843.

The total area of the island is 404,477 acres, of which 240,831 acres is under crofters, at a rent of £8430, 3s.; 124,648 acres under tacksmen, at a rental of £3951, lis.; 34,747 acres under deer forests, and 4251 acres held by others, such as ministers' glebes, town-lands, school and church sites, feus, and pleasure grounds. The total number of crofters in the island, as entered in the rent-roll, is 2948, besides 804 cottars or squatters.

The total area of the crofts, exclusive of hill pasture held in common, as recently ascertained by measurement, is 14,758 acres, which on an average gives 5 acres to each croft. But from the total area I estimate there should be about 3000 acres deducted for uncultivated land, and land unfit for cultivation within the boundaries of the crofts. This would leave 11,758 acres under cultivation, at an average rent of 14s. 5d. per acre, exclusive of pasture lands.

With regard to the clearances that took place since Sir James Matheson purchased the island, I may mention that it was not for the sake of profit that any one township was cleared, but that the land was such, in consequence of the potato failure and other causes, that the crofters could not make a livelihood or pay any rent. As a proof that Sir James had no desire to remove the people, I may mention that some years before he purchased the estate, the Seaforth trusteea had rented to Dr Macaulay the farm of Ardroil, and the townships of Valtos and Kneep. The crofters in these townships were to be removed. The trustees did not remove the crofters, and therefore Dr Macaulay raised an action, or threatened an action against them for damages for not giving possession of these townships. Rather than see the people removed, Sir James offered to contribute £500 towards the damages claimed by the Doctor, and also to take all his stock and effects on the farm of Ardroil at valuation, for which he paid £933, which offer was accepted by the trustees, and the crofters were allowed to remain, the trustees settling with Dr Macaulay by a payment of £4700. The reason for clearing the township of Reef was that it was not suitable for crofters. The ground being sandy, and the potato crop having failed, they could not raise enough of other crops to support them. There were no peats in the township, and they had to go a distance of eight miles to cut peats. Their summer pasture was also a distance of eight to ten miles from them, and they were very much in arrear of rent. They got two years to remove. Six of them took advantage of free emigration to America, and the rest of them were provided with vacant crofts in other townships.

Carnish was cleared in 1850. This township was even more unsuitable for crofters than Reef. The ground being also all sand, was unsuitable for growing corn crop; and when the potato crop failed, the crofters were left destitute. They had disposed of almost all their cattle, and were supported by the Highland Destitution Committee. They were nearly three years in arrear nf rent; and though they got the land free of rent, they could not support themselves. About one-third of them emigrated, and the rest settled in other townships in vacant lots from which the people went to America.

Hacklete and Ballygloom—The half of these townships was occupied by a tacksman who emigrated with two of the crofters iu 1853. The five remaining crofters removed to other townships, as they had not the means of stocking and paying for more lands, and being much in arrears.

Doune Carloway—A large portion of the pasture lands of this township having been drained, trenched, and enclosed, and a farmhouse and steading built, it was found necessary to remove the crofters to more suitable vacant lots in other townships. One family emigrated. This township and the farm was in 1872 given to the crofters of Mangursta, who, at their own request, were removed there.

Dalemore—This was a most unhealthy place, and the people were glad to leave it. There was hardly a healthy person in it. Every crofter had been twice married. They were over three years in arrears of rent. Four families emigrated; the others removed to other townships, where they were accommodated on vacant lots. This village was situated in a valley, the drainage of which was blocked up by the heavy surf, and though opened, soon filled up again. This caused the unhealthiness of the place.

Melbost Borv.—The crofters of this township could not be got to pay their rents, and they were often warned that if they did not pay they would be removed, but to no effect. Eight of them emigrated, and the rest got lots in other townships and new lands reclaimed at Ballantrushal.

North Tolsta.—This township had been formerly occupied by a tacksman, but prior to 1853 by twenty-five crofters. Of these four emigrated, and twenty-one removed to South Tolsta, where they were accommodated on vacant crofts of people who had gone to America.

North Galson.—The crofters of this township petitioned to be sent to America in 1863, as they could not maintain themselves on the lands they held. There were forty-three crofters; twenty-four emigrated, and nineteen were provided with vacant crofts in other townships. The rental of the township was £154; and at the time of their removal they were £289, 11s. 11d. in arrears of rent, which was wiped off, and they got valuation for such of their stock as they could not otherwise dispose of.

There were no crofters evicted forcibly, and no legal proceedings taken except the notice of removal, and even this same was not given in the case of the Galson crofters. The people were allowed to remain in their holdings till they had fixed on another place—some one, two, and three years; and assistance in most cases was given to build new houses. There were no people removed to a vacant lot in a township, if a crofter in that township wished to take the vacant croft in addition to the one he held, and pay for it. Had these townships not been cleared, the land left vacant by the people who went to America would have remained so. as up to 1854 there was no great demand for land except in the parish of Lochs.

I send herewith extracts from letters sent by those who emigrated to America to their friends in the Lews, showing how much more comfortable and well off they were in America in comparison to what they were in the Lews. I also send, as I promised the Commissioners I would do, printed copy of letters sent by emigrants to Sir James Matheson. I have to add that, though it was said by certain delegates that nothing was done to assist the crofters to build better houses, to mostly all the crofters who built improved houses, the proprietor made loans in the shape of money or materials, that no interest was charged on these loans, and that a great part of these loans are still outstanding.

In 1872 the crofters in the township of Barvas were made to build improved houses, with two doors and a division between the dwelling-house and the byre, and doors, windows, and other woodwork was supplied by the proprietor, to be repaid as the crofters could do so; but these houses were no time occupied when they closed one of the doors, and they went back to their old habit of having one entrance for the inmates and the cattle. The same thirty occurred in other townships as well as Barvas.

-P.S.—The total number of crofters in the Lews, as entered in the rentroll, is 2948, and 804 cottars or sub-tenants—in all, 3752 families. Should the whole island be given to these 3752 families, it would only give 108 acres to each family—the total area of the island being 404,477 acres. It is therefore clear that, if a Lews crofter would require from 6 to 10 acres of arable land, and from 400 to 700 acres of pasture lands, the present number of crofters cannot be provided with this area in the Lews.
WM. MACKAY.

Extracts from Letters from Lews Emigrants in Canada to Friends in Lewis, 1851 and 1864

I.—From DONALD MACDONALD, Dundas, to GEORGE SMITH, Callanish.
DUNDAS, 12th August 1851
I have to inform you that we are working here since we came to this place on the railway, and about 60 families from the Lews, and the wages going here is from 3s. 6d. to 4s. 6d. per day. "We have very hard work, but good meat—beef, pork, bread, and butter—and we bought a house that cost 20 dollars, that is £4 , and a store for 10 dollars.

II.—From DONALD CAMPBELL, Lingwick, to his FATHER, Lews.
LINGWICK, 23rd September 1851.
I am working at the railway which is passing through the province to the States, 810 miles long, and there is plenty work for many hundreds, and good payment too. Workmen are paid 4s. 6d. to 6s.; joiners, 7s. 6d.; masons, from 7s. to 10s. per day, and they are thinking that the railway works will continue for ten years, which wiH be a great advantage to this province, for it will furnish Canada with many thousands of pounds, and is profitable for emigrants. I don't want you better used than I am here, for I came here empty, and now I have plenty money to sustain my family this year; and I must say that this is a good country, and I wish that my friends were with me. I tell you, but you won't believe me, for I know the nature of the old couutry; you won't believe the truth, but if I told you lies you would believe me. However, I will tell you the truth, and want you all to come that is able to work. Oh ! young men of Ness, I want you to come here, and be not afraid. Leave the poor fishing at Ness. Oh! my brothers and sisters, and all of you, be sure and come here, and don't Live starving where you are.
DONALD CAMPBELL.

III.—From MALCOLM M'LEOD, County Sherbrooke, to JoHN M'LEOD,
Swanibost, Lews.
27th September 1851.
MY DEAR BROTHER,—I work here for 4s. 6d. per day, my uncle for 9s., and the most of those who came to America with me are working at the railroad, some at 4s. 6d., others at 4s. 9d. per day. AR I can say of Canada is that I am glad I came to it. You can tell Angus M'Ritchie if he had come here that his family would earn 20s. per day, and it is a wonder when people can content themselves at home when there is such good pasture in Canada. My dear brother, if you are of the same mind as when I left, I hope, before you are done reading this letter, your mind will be made up, and that you will not hesitate for a moment to say you are going to come, and we shall help you, and linger no longer on the barren soil of the poor decaying Lews. Let courage have its place in every starving Lewsman. I have ate nothing worse than bread, beef, pork, and potatoes, and every other necessary, since I came here. M&L M'LEOD.

IV.—From ANGUS M'LEOD, Lower Canada, to MALCOLM M'RITCHIE,
Swanibost, Ness.
13th August 1851
MY DEAR FATHER-IN-LAW,—The wages here is 27s. a week. Those that are cutting the grass have seven dollars a week. John, if you will come here you will get £30 sterling and your meat in the year, and although all the Lews would come here they would get work for 4s. 6d. per day.
ANGUS M'LEOD.

V.—From DONALD M'LEAN, Lingwick, to NoR. MACDONALD,
20th September 1851.
DEAR SIR,—I am of Findlay's opinion. I hope you may depend on my integrity, and beheve me that I am not under any necessity to tell lies. I am aware that if you and your father's famRy had come to this country you could earn from twelve to sixteen dollars per month each. The wages on the railroad is from 4s. 6d. to 5s. 3d. per day. Now I don't attempt to give you the least invitation against your own accord, but I am of opinion that if you shall be removed from Kneep you should not settle in any spot of the island. Labourers in this country get bed and board as good as the common gentleman in your country. DoNALD M'LEAN.

VI.—From DONALD MACDONALD, Dundas, to DcN. M'LEOD, Dalimore.
23 September 1851.
DEAR SiR,—I have to tell you that myself, my father, and all the rest are working at the railway, and we have very good wages—3s. 6d. per day. I get a barrel of white flour here for 16s., 1 lb. butter for 6d., 1 lb. beef for 3d., 1 bottle whisky for 2s., a pair of shoes for 10s., which would cost me 20s. in Stornoway, and many other things accordingly. DONALD MACDONALD.

VII.—From NORMAN M'LEOD, Brompton,
to ALEXANDER M'LEOD, Lower Barvas.
30 September 1851.

DEAR SIR,—I am here on the road to the Scotch settlement, working at the railway, which will be a great advantage to emigrants, for there is good wages here and the work easier than at home. Single workmen are paid from 4s. 6d., to 6s. 6d.; joiners, 7s. 6d.; masons, of 7s. 6d. to 10s. So you can judge of that. Government land is given to people for nothing—50 acres—and as much more as you like, for 4s. 6d. per acre. This place is different from yours, and I know it will be better for you to come here. It is easier for a man to live here on the work than to be there a tenant. All things have dealt well with us as yet, whatever they may do hereafter, and the Gospel is preached to us here. Every one that has boys should come. We are much obliged to the proprietor for his kindness in sending us here, for we know that we will be better here than we were at home. We are better off here than we were at home. I have to say that they are expecting railway work here for ten years, but it is leaving the meat dearer than in former years. It is about the same as in Scotland this year, and the potatoes have a little disease, but not bad. However, they don't live here on potatoes as they do at home.
NOR. M'LEOD.

VIII.—From JOHN M'LEOD (elder), Sherbrooke, to ALEXANDER M'LEOD, Valtos.
24th October 1851.
The emigrant agent came to Sherbrooke with us. The work at the railroad is going on. We get very good wages—4s. 6d. per day, I got 5s. for acting as superintendent, and now, since I began to work on the 1st of August till this day, I made £15. This is a better country for people than Lews, and there is a great demand for boys here to drive carts. They would get six dollars a month. The women were working at harvest, when they get 2s. 6d. per day. We have a free house from the contractor. The people that are here for a time are well off. I saw Ken. M'Leod. He is a rich man. He told me he would not give his property for yours now. He has 200 acres of land, 100 of which is cleared. Every one of our country people who came here are in good health. I know my friends at Lochs will be thinking that I will tell them the truth about America, and I will do so as far as I know about it. In the first place, I tell you or anyone who may inquire, that all above eighteen years wRl get 4s. 6d. a day, and boys about ten, 5 dollars a month and his board. We have plenty to eat and drink ; anyone need not be without meat and clothes here if he has a mind to work. Women get 2s. 6d. a day at harvest work here and board. Wheat is 5 doRars per barrel; potatoes, 2s. per bushel; beef, 3d per lb.; butter, 6d. per lb.; pork, 5d. per lb.

IX.—From MAURICE MACFARLANE, Stratford, Upper Canada, to ANGUS MACFARLANE, Melbost.
26th September 1851.
DEAR BROTHER,—I cannot give you much news about this country yet, but we are seeing them that came to this place five years ago are as well off as gentlemen in Scotland. Every good worker would do well here ; the wages are from £2 to £2. 10s. per month. This country is not so cold as Lower Canada. The cattle and the crops here are out all winter. There are more swine here among the farmers than sheep; they give better victuals to their swine here than what most gentlemen keep to their servants at home. Don't you think I am telling lies—no, as I am before God.
MAURICE MACFARLANE.

X.—From MURDO M'IvER, Lingwick, to ALEXANDER M'IVER, Laxay, Lews.
11th September 1881.
My DEAR FATHER,—I have to say about this country, any who wishes to work can get plenty, and good wages, from 4s. 6d. to 7s. 6d. per day; and I would advise young lads and young women to come here. I am sure the country will not please you at the beginning; but there is no fear of any man who can work, although he came here without one penny.
MURDO M'IVER.

XI.—From ANGUS YOUNG, Lingwick, to DONALD YOUNG, Callanish, Lews.
23rd October 1851.
DEAR FATHER,—I was employed at the railway mostly since I came here, at 4s. 6d. per day. I got a small house made on John M'Lean's lot, in order to pass the winter near the provision market, as the Government land is about eighteen miles from this place. I am very comfortable in the midst of the old settlers. I expect to begin on Monday at 5s. per day, which will continue as long as I shall be able to stop at the work. It is my intention to begin on Government land next spring, when I shall get land for 4s. 6d. per acre, and 50 acres grant to every individual above eighteen years of age. I freely state that my board since I came to tins country is as good as any gentleman in the land, so that it is a great pity that the young men have no courage to leave their slavery and come to this country, where they could live like men. The old settlers that came from the parish of Uig, Lews, are well off. I am very sorry you will not have the courage to come to a country where you can do so well. Tell John, my uncle, that I want him to come without loss of time. Girl's wages is from 2s. 6d. to 15s. per month. Tell Neil Macdonald that he can earn here 6s. 3d. to 12s. 6d. for making a coat. I wish to tell you, dear father, to prepare for migrating next summer; and I want you to tell all my friends to take the contents of my letter into consideration. ANGUS YOUNG.

XII.—From PEGGY MACIVER, Sherbrooke, to her Father, ANGUS MACIVER, Barvas.
DEAR FATHER,—I am now comparatively comfortable since I came here. I can send you better accounts than ever I could in Barvas, the best day ever I was in it. As soon as we landed, the agent sent us out in carts sixty miles, and there the most of the emigrants remained, where they got immediate employment at the railroad for 4s. 6d. per day. Our table can now be as well furnished as the minister's, and can have as much clear at the end of the month as the family costs. We got temporary houses put up for us, and are so far quite comfortable. Catherine, m y sister, and Angus, would do exceedingly well here. I am sure he would suffer more in one day's fishing than he would do here in a month. I would advise all my friends to come here, fully aware that it would be for their benefit. I hope you will all be preparing to come here. It is in my power to assist you even now.
PEGGY MACIVER.

XIII.—From MALCOLM SMITH, Stratford, to JOHN SMITH, Bragar, Lews.
29th September 1851.
DEAR UNCLE—I think that you will come here if you get the chance we got. You will be far better here than at home; and if you will come, bring my brother Murdo. Tell Murdo M'Lean if he and his family were here they would be very well off. John and Rosy would get £30 a year. Tell my aunt to try and come, and if I will be spared before her, she need not be afraid to come; and I would advise every one of you to come as soon as you can, for this is a very good country for food. There is no want of anything here and we are as happy here as the day is long. I repent very much because I did not come here before. Poor people makes great harm to themselves in stopping too long in your poor country. MALCOLM SMITH.

XIV.—From JoHN MACKENZIE, Lingwick, to NoRMAN MATHESON, Barvas.
DEAR BROTHER,—It seems, as far as we can understand, that all from first to last is a preparation for the poor of the Lews, as provision is cheap and plentiful, and the people that have labourers can get through without much hardship. All the railroad is going on at Sherbrook, and all who are able to work are working at it, and welcome. Dear Norman, I hope you will come ; and if you will not, send me John to prepare for you, by Sandy Morrison, as I hope Sandy will come any way, who would doweR here. Wages are from 4s. 6d. to 5s. per day. I was very sorry when I saw the rest coming, that you were not along with them, and I cannot describe how sorry I am; and if I was near you, as I am far from you, you might not be in such hardship.
JOHN MACKENZIE.

XV.—From J. A. M'IVER, Brompton, to MURDO M'IVER, Barvas, Lews.
DEAR FATHER,—I have to praise God for being so well ruled by His hand, and in getting so many good chances since we left you—that is, a good passage; and when we came to Quebec, we were forwarded in steamers, and sent with our luggage to the Scotch settlements; but I have stopped here working, for there is good work going on, and good wages, being from 4s. 6d. to 6s: per day, and the work is not so hard as in the old country. I know that you will not repent coming here. J. A. M'lvER.

XVI.—From Rev. EwEN M'LEAN, Melbourne, to J. M. MACKENZIE, Esq.,
Chamberlain, Stornoway.
6th Nov. 1851.
MY DEAR SiR,—I and our family, in the good providence of God, arrived safe at Quebec, after a passage of seven weeks from the Clyde. I am here on the railroad, where I have taken up quarters during the cold months. The most of my flock have gone up to Lingwick, and mingled with Mr Gordon's people, which excludes my services. Others have gone up to Upper Canada, and the remainder are hereabouts on the railroad. The wages here are exceedingly good—35s. per week. This is a good country for labourers and tradesmen. The country is to be cut up by length and breadth with railroad, and will give abundance of work to all classes. Tailors, shoemakers, and merchants do well here. They live in the first style, and in habit most comfortable houses. I could give you no idea of the comfort. The country abounds with every good thing; it knows no want. You have only to look after the people for a few months, and you will make them
lairds in a few years. The atmosphere is most pure and healthy. Pasture is rich, and the sod excellent. Every man fit for, and willing to work, will in a few years be very comfortable here. EWEN M'LEAN

Copy correspondence as to Lews Emigrants in Canada, 1864.

I.—From A. C. BucnANAN, Chief Agent, Government Emigration Office, Quebec, to Sir JAMES MATHESON of the Lews.
24th March 1864

MY DEAR SiR,—It is some time since I had occasion to address you, and I do so now in consequence of a letter lately received by me from Mr Murray, of Glasgow, transmitting copy of a letter sent home by John Grahame, one of the emigrants, whom you assisted to reach Canada last summer, and now settled it appears in the eastern townships. This person's description of the hardships he endured induced me to forward his letter to the Rev. Mr Milloy, Free Church minister, who resides in that quarter, accompanied by a request that the facts of the case might be inquired into, and the truth made known to me. Mr Milloy's reply, which reached me yesterday, together with a statement signed by the heads of eleven families, I now enclose; and I think they sufficiently establish the falsity of Grahame's tale. At anyrate, I hope they will have the effect of removing from your mind any unfavourable impression that may have been entertained as to the welfare of your people in this their adopted land; I also forward a letter received from Mr Pope, M.P. for their county, the original of which I sent to Mr Murray a short time ago, containing a refutation of Grahame's statement witlr reference to himself, and corroborating Mr Milloy's. I think you should have those statements published in Lews as an encouragement to others. Although I have no direct communication with those families who went to Western Canada, yet from what I learn they have been successful, and are doing well.—I am, &c, A. BUCHANAN.

II.—Rev. Mr MILLOY to Mr A. C. BUCHANAN, Quebec.
LINGWICK MANSE, 21st March 1864
MY DEAR SiR,—I duly received yours enclosing a letter of Mr Murray's, Glasgow, also copy of a letter from one John Grahame, of Winslow, to Sir James Mathcson's factor in the Lews, Scotland; I herewith enclose both, and make the following reply to yours :—
I was not acquainted with John Grahame before your letter arrived, but upon inquiry I found he is teaching a school in Winslow, and that he suffered no hardship since he came here unless it be that his imagination troubled him. His necessities are not real, therefore, for I am credibly informed that the liberality of the people hitherto supplied all his immediate wants. He did not buy any provisions for himself since he came, and his barrel of meal is yet pretty well filled. The same thing is true of others of the emigrants who came here last summer. One of them, who has a family of seven, told me a few days ago that he did not buy a pound of provisions since he came here. The kindness and hospitaRty of the original settlers are beyond all praise. I believe there would be no real distress here, though one hundred families arrived among us last year, and if such a number were to come any year employment would be found for them. It is not true, as Grahame's letter says, that no work could be found last summer for the emigrants who arrived, and as to his remarks as to the quality of the land to be sold in this district, poor Grahame is no authority; perhaps my opinion, who has been here eleven years, and also travelled over Upper and Lower Canada, ought to be more correct, and I give it as my judgment that the eastern townships of Lower Canada are in some respects preferable to the best parts of Upper Canada. For barley, potatoes, and buckwheat nothing can beat it, and its grazing capabilities are remarkable—there is no part of Upper Canada to compare with the eastern townships for raising stock. If we had here some emigrants from the agricultural parts of the Highlands or from the Lowlands of Scotland, I am confident that they would produce native stock such as no other part of Canada would compete with. Then the quantity of land ; it will take a good many years of such numbers as Lews can send to fill it up. Provisions are very cheap and plenty—oats are sold at Is. 6d. per bushel; barley, 2s. per bushel; buckwheat, 2s.; the very best beef at 3d.; Hour, 5½ dollars per barrel; and butter 7½d. to 10d. per lb. I think I can account for the dark picture Grahame drew of the country. As a general rule, new comers are not on their arrival in. this country very good judges of what they see before them. The forest and everything that surrounds them is different from what they expect, and they are apt to fall into a gloomy mood which, however, the experience of a time drives away. But it is evident that Grahame wanted money from Sir James' factor, and thought the best way to get it was to tell a doleful tale. I hope, therefore, that his letter will not have the least effect upon Sir James' mind, and that he may continue his praiseworthy efforts to ameliorate the condition of his poor people by giving them facilities to come to this country as he used to do. I have caused a paper to be drawn up and signed by the new emigrants here, and the Rev. Mr Macdonald of Winslow, I believe, will also sign it. JOHN MILLOY.

III.—EMIGRANTS' STATEMENT referred to in Rev. J. MILLOY's Letter.
We, the undersigned emigrants from the Island of Lews, understanding that some persons have been sending bad accounts of this country to Sir James Matheson by which he may be influenced in his action hereafter in sending emigrants to Canada, and wishing that every facility may be given to our friends at home which, from motives of humanity, Sir James has been accustomed to afford them, to leave home and to come to this good and large land, would beg to make the following statement of our experience and feelings in the matter, trusting these will have the effect of nullifying the influence the accounts referred to might have on Sir James' mind, and on those of our own friends at home who may be deterred from the course we would wish them to take, viz., emigrate here as soon as ever they can.

1. We have no complaint to make about the way we were treated on the voyage, and on our arrival we received the greatest kindness from strangers, especially in Sherbrook, where the Mayor of the town and other benevolent gentlemen took the liveliest interest in our welfare, and supplied our wants liberally, and on our arrival at a Scotch settlement in Lingwick we met our fellow countrymen, who welcomed us with the utmost cordiality, and invited us to their houses, where we enjoyed their hospitality till we took up land for ourselves and had houses of our own to live in, and since we have been treated with remarkable kindness, and had all our wants supphed.

2. In reference to the country we are well satisfied with it. The land is good, and plenty of it; in the township of Lingwick alone there is land of the best quality to be sold sufficient to receive 300 families, and as many or more in the adjoining township of Bury and although all the inhabitants of Lews were to emigrate in a body, there is sufficient land for them here in the eastern townships of Lower Canada.

3. The climatc is most excellent, the winter especially, though somewhat cold, is very pleasant and healthy. We never were healthier or happier, and the work of chopping is the cleanest and nicest work we ever tried. We endured greater hardships by far at home from the cold than we do working in the woods here even in the coldest winter day.

4. The lands in Bury and Lingwick are owned by the British American Land Company. We prefer to settle on their land, though it is dearer than Government land, because we had not to go any distance from the old settlers, who came here not more than twenty years ago, and because the land is very superior. The company charges us 2½ dollars (about 10s. sterling) an acre in Lingwick, and the terms are very favourable. They do not push anyone to pay if he was twenty years in a place, as long as they get the interest, and they allow us to work for them on the roads, which they take as payment for the interest due on our land. Government land is only 3s. per acre.

5. Church and schools are quite convenient—the church about two miles, and to those furthest away not over five miles.

In conclusion, we wish that this report be communicated through A. C. Buchanan, Esq., emigration agent at Quebec, to Sir James Matheson, or his factor, and that our countrymen may be encouraged to follow us. The most of us sent encouraging accounts to our friends at home already, but we wish to make our views public to all our countrymen. We would say also that some of us have been working on the railway, but if we got one crop in the ground we will not need to work much after that. Those that are willing to work come to us, we have labour, and comfort, and abundance; but to all indolent people we say, this is not the place for you, for lazy folk don't get comfortable or rich in America no more than in other parts of the world.

(Signed as under)

Nor. Macdonald (x his mark)
Nor. Graham (x his mark)
Angus Morison
Hen. Mciver
Dond Chisholm
Alexr Graham
Ewen Mclennan (x his mark)
Dond Nicolson
John Mcmillan
Murdo Mclennan
Thos. Macdonald

We , the undersigned, testify that the foregoing paper was explained in Gaelic to those whose names are attached thereto.
JOHN MILLOY, minister.
JAMES Ross, postmaster.

IV.—From KENNETH M'LEOD, County Bruce, to his MoTHER-iN-LAw.
CANADA WEST, January 7, 1864.

I have great pleasure in telling you that we got here very successfully. Our fare was paid—I had only 15s. to pay for the distance of thirty miles; and we are living with Angus Mackay as yet. I have also to tell you that you need not be mournful about your daughter coming to Canada, for she has been dealt with very favourably since her departure from you. We have all plenty to eat and drink, and hopeful prospects for the future. There is three townships surveyed by the Government for emigrants to go to next spring, and the prices are from 1 to 50 dollars. The land is on the shore of Lake Huron, and I gave in my name the other day to take up 300 acres. We can get to the land in spring by steam or sailing vessel. In reference to the country, I have no hesitation in saying that anyone who comes to Canada will be satisfied. I am perfectly satisfied myself. Women and girls from the old country will find a great change from hard and slavish work, for they do not require here to do outside work in the way they do at home. There has been a great amount of false reports sent from this country in regard to cold and sickness which are not true in this part of Canada. We are within two miles of the church. Tell Mai. Mackay, Cralowick, that we are living with his brothers, and they are very kind to us. They have plenty of the world, such as stock and land. KENNETH M'LEOD.

V.—From the Same to his Brother at Callanish, Lews.
MY DEAR BROTHER,—I have to inform you that I am well. I promised to give you the circumstances and conditions of this country. It is my opinion that the country is very prosperous. I have seen a year-old heifer having a calf, and a year-old ewe having a lamb. You can tell Norman that I think he should not suffer in the old country but come to Canada, because I do believe that he could do far better here. I may tell you that my uncle and the boys are very glad and satisfied since they came here, and say they would not go back again. KENETH M'LEOD.

VI.—From J. H . Pope, M.P., to Mr A. C. BUCHANAN, Chief Emigration Agent, Quebec.
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY, QUEBEC, 3rd April 1864.

DEAR SIR.—I have perused the letter of John Graham, late from Galson, and as you express a wish that I should inform you whether there were grounds for the complaints that he makes, I hasten to reply. The first matter of which he complains is that there is no employment to be obtained on roads, and that matters are very dull, and money scarce, &c. As to employment, I myself employ in lumbering operations every season several hundred men during winter in Winslow and adjoining townships, and have made a point of giving employment to new settlers as much as possible, and have done so this season to several Norwegian and Scotch settlers. There has been none refused who applied to me under such circumstances excepting one man, viz., Mr Walker of Bury, who applied too late. Of course, in all new settlements, where people have little to purchase money with except labour, it is not very abundant. Mr Graham goes on to say that he has applied to me for help. This is the first time that I have heard that he or any one of the emigrants who arrived last season were in want of assistance. On the contrary, when I was in Winslow about three weeks since, I was told by the Mayor and the Mayor of Whitton there, they were all well pleased and in want of nothing. They both expressed their regret that so few had come there during the last season.

As to provisions being high, you may be your own judge when I give you the prices at their doors—flour, 6 dollars per barrel; beef, from 4 cents to 5 cents per lb.; oats and barley, 1 cent per lb. ; potatoes, 25 cents per bushel. Now, as to the quaRty of the land, there are thousands of acres of good farming land in blocks, which only require industry and energy to convert into good farms. I further say that no man willing to work for a living can possibly want for the necessaries of life in this part of the country now ; for instance, when I was last in Lingwick, I was informed that five of last year's emigrants had settled in that township, that they had gone upon their lands with only their axe in their hand, that they at once commenced clearing land and making salts, that they have supported their families from the sales of their salts, and besides they would be in a position to get in a good crop from the land they had cleared while making their salts.

Finally, m y opinion is that no industrious man will complain, but in this as in other countries, men must work for their living, and I only regret that instead of the fifteen families which came there last season we had not got 300, as there is abundance of good land and food. I am sure they would do well.
—I am, &c., J. H . Pope.

I.—From JOHN MACDONALD, Mayor of Whitton (late of Callanish, in Lewis),
to Sir JAMES MATHEson, Bart., M.P.

WHITTON, LAKE MEGANTIC, C.E., February 21, 1866.
HONOURED SiR,—I hope that you will excuse me for the liberty of addressing you a few lines from this section of the country, to give you a true account of how the Lewis people are getting along. I am sure it will be gratifying to you to learn that they are all doing well. Fifteen years ago, I, with a great many others, came to this country, and I may say penniless. That was a hard thing, as we thought at the time, but we got plenty to do, and were well paid for it; and I may say that we did not know what want was since. We have roads and churches, and a post often follows us right into the backwoods. You would be surprised to-day to see the people that left Lewis fifteen years ago; there are some of them no doubt better off than others, but they all have enough to eat. To give you an idea of how some of them are getting along:—Murdo Macleod, from Back, that came here about ten years ago, sold already this year two tons of grain, and when he came here was as green about farming as any of us. The great help to a man here is to have a steady and respectable family; they are sure of success. I don't care if they would not have a shilling in the world coming here. If they don't like farming they can learn any trade they like, and get pay enough to support them while they are learning their trade. The greatest drawback to our country people is their children going out to work through the country for other people, in place of remaining in the family, and working on their own farms. This I know from experience. When my father landed in Quebec with seven children, fifteen years ago, there was only one solitary half-crown in the whole family. We thought it was hard, while no one in the family could speak English but myself and my sister. After working for two years we took up a farm, and carried seed eight miles through the woods. We raised, the first year, provision enough to support the family, and since then we had enough and to spare. My father died two years ago, but before he died he saw the comforts of Canada, and that his three sons had 100 acres of land each, three yoke of oxen, twenty sheep, and four milch cows, besides pigs, poultry, and so on. But, honoured Sir, we are under great obligations to you for the comforts we enjoy here, the great kindness you have done us in sending us here—only for you, it is likely we would be in Lewis yet. Through our own ignorance at the time, we thought that we were oppressed, but we learned to think differently of it since. It is a great blessing for any country that is over-peopled like Lewis, to have such a proprietor, and such a country as Canada open for them, and especially for Scotland and her loyal sons, where they have as much protection from the British Government as if they were in the Isle of Lewis; and a country, I may say, wholly governed by Scotchmen or of Scotch descent

Those who don't do well in Canada, are those who expect to find money on the streets when they come, and those who think that their friends ought to support them through life, because they advised their coming here. William Ross, from Shader in Lewis, came to my house lately and advised me to petition the Government to give the people provisions this year. I replied that, were I to petition Government, it would be to put them all in jail for 'loafing' about, since he and others came to the country in the summer, feeding on their friends when they ought to be working for themselves and families, independent of any Government. This made him change his tune, and he admitted that he had already 600 lbs. of meal in the house, and 24 dols. of money that he earned since he came here. Such men as these do a good deal of harm to this country, and, I am sure, send false reports home to their friends, and especially if they think that they can ' gouge ' any money out of them.

Another class thick more of a glass of bad liquor in a tavern at night than they do of their cattle in the barn, but I am glad to say that this class is few.
The statistics of the Municipality of Whitton were, in 1863 :—
Acres assessed, . . . . 2,781
Ratepayers assessed, . . . 118
Assessed value of real estate, . . $23,000
Liabilities, 4 dollars, or £1 currency,
Revenue, 260 dollars.
In these figures there is nothing set down for stock, and I may also state that the only capital that came into this municipality was the chopping axe and there is not a man in it but a Lewis man. I hope you will excuse this long and tedious letter ; and wishing yourself and Lady Matheson, in this world and the world to come, all happiness,—
I remain, very respectfully,
JOHN MACDONALD, Mayor of Whitton.
P.S.—Reference to J. H . PopE, Esq., -P.M. This letter is at your pleasure.

II.—Excerpt from Letter,—JOHN MACLEOD, Richmond, Canada East, to Sir JAMES MATHESON, Bart., M.P.,
dated 23rd February 1866—a native of Loch in Lewis, sent out by Sir J. Matheson.

As regards the Lewis people who were sent to the eastern townships, the greater part of them arc in the same neighbourhood, and number, I suppose, 400 families, and upon the whole are aR doing very well. It is true they have met with hardships in the outset, yet their circumstances are so much improved, and their prospects for the future so much better than they could have been at home, that they feel glad that they have removed hither; and they can never express the thankfulness they feel towards yourself for your kind part in their removal. They have two churches, with Gaelic ministers settled over them, and form the two largest Protestant congregations in the eastern townships.

The young folks of the settlement get plenty of work through the surrounding country; and so much are they thought of, as compared with others, that in two villages, not together as large as Stornoway, there are at present no less than fifty or sixty of the young woman employed as servant girls. They felt quite proud of their old proprietor, when I informed them with what great kindness you treated myself on the occasion of my visit of last summer; and as for myself, I shaR always feel myself under obligation for the friendly treatment which I experienced at your hand, and no less at the hands of Lady Matheson.

When at home, intentionaRy refrained from encouraging any of the people to this country, fearing that they might blame me should matters turn out here contrary to their expectations. Yet I hesitate not to say that, could they be helped in the outset, few persons, if any, would have reason to regret emigration to these parts.

—Excerpt from Letter.—JOHN M'KENZIE, Lake Megantic, Canada East, to his Brother, RORY M'KENZIE, Back, Lewis, dated February 1, 1866.
I am sorry to learn that you have made up your mind to leave poor Marion alone. After all, I am sure that you will be better here than there. Your children will have a chance to leam a great deal more here than there, and their future prospects, as far as worldly matters are concerned, look a good deal brighter; and you have a good deal better chance to get along, with the strong family you have than me that is alone. But, after all, I sold already eleven barrels of oats, and gave ten barrels of potatoes to the hogs—besides keeping enough for my own use. I have one cow and one heifer. Nobody need be afraid but that he will get land in this country; there is enough and to spare. If every man in Lewis should come, they would get all they wanted for the nominal price of half a crown per acre.

IV.—From NORMAN MACKENZIE to RORY MACKENZIE, Back, Lewis.
LAKE MEGANTIC, February 1, 1866.
DEAR BROTHER,—We got your kind letter, and were glad to hear that you were all well, as this leaves us at present. You wanted to know the state of this place; you know that I can't give you as good an idea of this place as those that came before me ; still, I ought to be thankful, and especially to the honourable gentleman that helped me to come here, as you know that I would not be able to come here without his help, for which he has my sincere thanks. I did not have very good luck since I came here. I lost two cows ; but now I have the third one. and a heifer, and one sheep, and plenty to eat; and if I landed in Lewis as empty as I came here, I would not be likely to have any of these comforts. But what spoils a great many—they come here with great expectations, thinking they will get the gold on the streets. Such men ought to stay at home; this is no country for sluggards. Bf a steady, industrious man comes here, he is sure to get along well, and that in a very short time. One great blessing we have here, we have always plenty to eat, and some to spare. That is all I am going to say about the country, except the greatest blessing of all, we have the Gospel preached to us in our own tongue. Donald, Sandy's son, had a saw-mill up and working when I came here, and he has along with that a turning-mill. Murdo, my brother, has got a young son. Marion is with him still, and she gave me more comfort in the education she got than in all I ever had in Lewis. She writes all her own letters now. Dear brother, I pity you from my heart—at sea day and night, and I may say, nothing for it, &c.—
Your dear brother, NORMAN MACKENZIE

Appendix XL

2010-08-02T17:44:00.000+01:00

REPORT by JOHN DUTHIE on FISHERIES, to Mr J. MUNRO MACKENZIE, Chamberlain of Lewis, from 1848 to 1854.

In answer to your questions as regards the fishermen generally on the Aberdeen coast, and here in particular.

1. Fishers do not have land further than what is attached to their houses, which are fbus or leases of 99 years, about ¼ acre, and used as kitchen garden.

2. They do not keep cows nor horses. All their time, when not actually engaged in fishing, is required in making lines and mending nets, and their material used in fishing. They let the farmer have the cows and horses, and stick to their boat.

3. Generally two boats are used on this coast—one for the haddock fishing, length of keel 22 to 28 feet, termed a 'Garibaldi boat' the other the herring or deep-sea fishing boat, 44 to 46 feet of keel. The crew for haddock boat is six men. They must be all practical fishers ; every man requires a practical knowledge of his work in all its forms, unpractical or green hands not being employed. The larger boat, seven to eight men in the crew, same remarks apply, when engaged at line fishing. When engaged at herring fishing two or three practical fishermen can, with the assistance of hired hands, accomplish the work.

4. The cost of the larger boat is from £200 to £250, fitted for sea without fishing material. A new net costs about, at present time, £ 3 , 5s. to € 3 , 10s. The average value of a fleet of say seventy nets, with buoys, & c , would be about £200, that is new and old as used.

5. The lesser boat as used would cost from £45 to £50 ready for sea. Each fisherman, when equiped for the haddock fishing, requires at least four lines, costing about 25s. each up to 30s.; and for cod and ling fishing, as prosecuted by men here, each man 2000 fathoms length of line, with 500 hooks attached. The value of lines for each man would be about £6.

6. We begin herring fishing on this coast about first week in July. A boat's crew in a good season would have about £40 profit, say for about 200 crans of herrings.

7. For upwards of forty years I have fished at different parts of the West Islands, from Cape Wrath round by Lewis to Coll Island and Barra, and for the five months' work from 1st February to end of June have had as much as 17 tons cured and dried ling and as little as 6 to 7 tons, and got as much as £31, 10s. per ton and as low as £15. We leave here for west coast cod and ling fishing in February. Stop fishing middle of June, just in time to get our fish to market, and begin herring fishing. An average fishing of ling I consider about 10 tons ; it does not pay under that.

Your 8th and last question. I have been engaged at lobster nshing, cod, ling, and herring nshing, in the West Highlands, but only at one of these at one time. No fisherman can to any advantage prosecute at same time more than one branch. He must give his whole attention, and do as much work as possible. He cannot, in the short day in March, do as much work as later in May. As the day lengthens so his work increases, by adding to length of line daily in use.

I add a few general remarks:—
Generally speaking, the fisherman here is his own proprietor ; he holds his house under feu charter at so much per pole rent per annum, or under lease of 99 years. Formerly fishing towns along the coast were, as it was termed, sit and pay ; they had no title, but that has become obsolete, and now mostly all hold as above, and the general size of holdings are about ¼ acre. I do not say the same could be carried out in the Highlands, as climate and circumstances differ ; but as regards fishing, it is the best ling fishing banks in the world, and with pushing native fishermen, they could make a very good job of it. It is a great expense to us to leave house and families at home. If it did not pay us to go, we would not do so. When I went to fish at first in the Highlands,
they were as bad as the Irish to us,—threatened to kill us, destroyed lobster creels at night and stole them, and became so bold as to take possession of our boat, and threatened to kill us, took a gun we had, &c. We were obliged to call in the help of the law, and a few of these men were taken to Domoch, tried, and punished. We had treatment similar, but not so bad, at several other places. Other crews were treated similarly, but all is now changed. They have benefited by our visits, and we are now made welcome, and it pays us to go. If they do not push, they get no share of the harvest; but to be a farmer and fisherman at same time will never do. He must give up one of them. If he has too many irons in the fire he will get burned.

JOHN DUTHIE.

Appendix XXXIX

2010-08-02T17:43:00.001+01:00

STATEMENT on behalf of Lady MATHESON of the Lews.

LADY MATHESON has asked that the following paper should be appended to the evidence taken by this Commission, viz.:—

(a) The original letter from Kenneth Nicholson, Calbost, of which an imperfect copy which was printed which omits the threatening paragraph referred to in the minutes of evidence, Q. 18455 and following.

(b) Statement No. 1, relating to the population, area, and local taxation of the Lewis.

(c) Statement No. 2, detailing the expenditure incurred by the late Sir James Matheson in his attempts to develop the resources of that island.
With reference to the petition mentioned in Kenneth Nicholson's letter, Lady Matheson explains, that' having been answered by anticipation in 1880, it needed no written acknowledgment in January 1882, though a verbal answer was given.

CALBOST LOCHS, BY STORNOWAY,
23rd December 1882.
LADY MATHESON OF THE LEWIS,

HONOURED LADY,—On behalf of a number of fishermen residing at Calbost, Maravich, and Gravir, in the parish of Lochs, I beg leave most respectfully to send you herewith copy of a petition, addressed by us to your ladyship, through Mr M'Kay, chamberlain of Lewis, last January, and to which we have had no reply.
Trusting we may not be led to resort reluctantly to such steps as many of our unfortunate countrymen are forced to adopt.
May I take the liberty of asking that you be so good as let the petitioners know your own views regarding the matters contained in the petition,
—I have the honour to be, your ladyship's obedient servant,
KENNETH NICOLSON

STATEMENT No. 1.
Memorandum as to the population and area of the island of Lewis.

Population in 1755 6,396
Do. 1791 8,371
Do. 1801 9,168
Do. 1811 10,099
Do. 1821 12,231
Do. 1831 14,541
Do. 1841 17,037
Do. 1851 19,694
Do. 1861 21,059
Do. 1871 23,443
Do. 1881 25,487

To the population of 1881, 400 militiamen should be added, who were out of the island at the time of taking the census.

Population in 1841 17,037
Do. 1851 17,694
Increase in ten years 2,657

Population in 1851 19,694
Do. 1861 (exclusive of 1772 who emigrated) 21,059
Increase in ten years 1,365

Population in 1861 21,059
Do. 1871 (exclusive of 459 emigrants) 23,443
Increase in ten years 2,384

Population in 1871 23,443
Do. 1881 (including 400 militiamen out of the island when the census was taken) 25,887
Increase in ten years 2,444

Total increase in forty years 8,850
Population of the island in 1881 25,887

Deduct: Burgh of Stornoway 2,626
Tacksmen and others, not crofters... 789
3,413

Leaving a crofter population of 22,474 on 2881 crofts, all under £5 of yearly rent, yielding a gross rental of £8167, 2s., or an average rental of £2 , 17s. per croft; and gives a population of nearly ight souls per croft.

The population of the county of Ross, exclusive of the island of Lewis is 52,633

The gross rental of the county, as per valuation roll, exclusive of the Lewis, is £264,768.

The population of the island of Lewis is 25,887

With a gross rental, as per valuation roll, of only £26,666.
The population of the county of Sutherland, in 1881, including the burgh of Dornoch,was 23,326

and the island of Lewis, including the police burgh of Stomoway 25,887

Showing a population of 2561 more in the Lewis than in the whole county of Sutherland.

The area of the county of Sutherland is 1,207,188 acres, which give 51 3/4 acres to each soul of the inhabitants ; whereas, in the island of Lewis there is only an area of 417,460 or about 16 acres for each soul of the population.

The rental of the Lewis is, therefore, in the proportion of £1000 for every thousand of the population; whereas, in the rest of the county of Ross, the rent stands in the proportion of £5000 to every thousand of the population. Consequently, local rates in the Lewis must be five times more than in the rest of the county.
Taking the landward parishes of the Lewis, viz., Lochs, Uig, and Barvas, there is a population of 15,192, with an assessable rental of £12,000. For these three parishes 22 schools have been provided, with school accommodation for 3114 children.

The rates and taxes in the Lewis for the last three years have been as follows:—payable, one half by proprietrix and one half by tenants:—

STORNOWAY
Year ending    Parochial rates    School rates    Roads    Total
15 May 1880    2/10        1/8        1/0    5/6
1881        3/2        2/2        1/0    6/4
1882        3/4        2/0        1/0    6/4

LOCHS
Year ending    Parochial rates    School rates    Roads    Total
15 May 1880    2/10        3/0        1/0    6/10
1881        3/10        4/6        1/0    9/4
1882        3/10        4/2        1/0    9/0

UIG
Year ending    Parochial rates    School rates    Roads    Total
15 May 1880    3/4        2/8        1/0    7/0
1881        3/8        4/6        1/0    9/2
1882        2/6        2/8        1/0    8/2

BARVAS
Year ending    Parochial rates    School rates    Roads    Total
15 May 1880    3/2        3/4        1/0    7/6
1881        3/10        6/8        1/0    11/6
1882        3/6        3/8        1/0    8/2

The average births in the Lewis for each year for 26 years, ending with 1880, was 755 4/13
Average deaths 363 7/26
Do. marriages 126 5/26
STORNOWAY, 18th January 1883.

STATEMENT N o . 2.
Memorandum as to expenditure incurred by the late Sir James Matheson, with the view of developing the resources of the Island of Lewis.

In his evidence before the Commission at Stornoway, Mr William Mackay mentioned the following items of expenditure for the above purpose, the total amount of which is here added up :—

Building houses and reclaiming land £99,720
School buildings and teachers' salaries 11,680
Roads and bridges 25,593
Patent slip at Stomoway 6,000
Fish-curing houses at Stomoway 1,000
Steamboat quay 2,225
Bulls for improvement of crofters' stock 1,200
Chemical work 33,000
Loss in establishing steam communication 15,000
Loss on improved mail service 16,800
£212,218

In addition to the above, Sir James Matheson spent on—
Brickworks £6,000
Meal and seed for crofters in years of destitution 30,000
Emigration 11,000
47,000
Making a total of £259,218
Irrespective of the cost of the mansion house at Stornoway, and of the shooting lodges at Morsgail and Uig.

Appendix XXXVIII

2010-08-02T17:42:00.001+01:00

See Appendix XLIV

STATEMENT by the Rev. JAMES STRACHAN, Minister of Barvas,

MANSE OF BARVAS,
STORNOWAT, 1st September 1883.

SIR,
—I am instructed to send you, for the information of the Commissioners, the accompanying statement, which has also been sent for publication in the Inverness Courier, the Northern Chronicle and the Scotsman newspapers.—

Your obedient servant, JAMES STRACHAN.
The SECRETARY, Royal Commission
(Highlands and Islands).

STORNOWAY.—The late Sheriff Macdonald

With reference to the aspersions recently cast on the judicial conduct of the late Sheriff MacDonald by Mr Napier Campbell, solicitor, before the Crofters' Commission at Stornoway,

—We, the undersigned, beg publicly to record that the worthy sheriff was personally well known to us for many years, and to most of us, during the whole of his career in the Lewis, and that he was always regarded by us, and, we believe, by the public generally, as an upright and impartial judge, and as a man of the most humane and kindly disposition. With regard to the crofters—in connection with whose affairs his official administration has been assailed—we can testify that he manifested at all times a warm interest in their welfare (as well as in that of the people at large) ; and we are persuaded that all his decisions were based on what he conscientiously considered the essential right and law of each particular case, without fear or favour of rich or poor. That Sheriff MacDonald, like other judges, may not have committed errors in judgment we do not, of course, presume to assert; but we know that anything like harshness or injustice was wholly foreign to his nature; that the sentences pronounced by him leant, as a rule, far more to the side of mercy than of severity; that in private life he was so genial and loveable as to be still mourned by numerous attached friends; and that his memory is held in the highest esteem by the general community.

It was, therefore, with not less pain than surprise that we observed Sheriff MacDonald's good name to be evil spoken of; and a sense of justice constrains us to publish this statement in vindication of his character.

ALEXANDER MORISON, Lloyds Agent - ROD. MILLAR, J.P.

KEN. MACKENZIE, J.P. - CHAS. MACRAE, J.P.

JAMES STRACHAN, J.P. - KENNETH SMITH, J.P.

P.S.
— I am requested to add that, had it been deemed necessary, it would have been easy to get the foregoing statement signed by a multitude of other names.

JAMES STRACHAN.

Appendix XXXVII

2010-08-02T17:41:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT of Rev. JAMES STRACHAN, M.A., Minister of Barvas, near Stornoway.

MANSE OF BARVAS,
28th Sept. 1883.

The average rent of a crofter's holding in the parish of Barvas is £3, which with rates and road money added, will generally amount to an annual payment of £3 , 16s. It is obvious that, in order to render farming on so humble a scale sufficiently remunerative to yield to the fanner and his dependants the commonest necessaries of life, a very large percentage of profit must be realised. Still, an ordinary lot (as it is called) of land, embracing as it does five acres of ground under cultivation, and a run of moorland or meadow commonty calculated to pasture three cows with their followers, one horse, and twenty to thirty sheep, might be expected to maintain a family of the class in question in circumstances of comparative comfort. The crofter, however, or small tenant, does not, as a rule, reap the full benefit designed for him by the proprietor. For:

The space intended for the support of a single household is, in many cases, crowded with two, and, in some cases, with even three distinct families. A youth is scarcely turned twenty when it behoves him, or (what is the same thing) it pleases him, to take unto himself a wife ; and there being no other means of subsistence open for the young couple (and their coming offspring), the father or father-in-law receives the venturesome pair into his own, or into a hastily improvised contiguous dwelling, and constitutes them shareholders on his own old lot. This system of subdivision—carried on, be it borne in mind, in defiance of the estate rules, and likely to be continued in a community where a man who passes the age of thirty-five without marrying is looked upon as committed to hopeless celibacy—must go far to explain the general poverty. But:

Secondly
The common crofter fails to turn the soil in his possession, such as it is, to proper account. His agriculture is of the most primitive sort. Trenching, draining, fencing—all so requisite on land subjects of even the best description—are to him operations either wholly unknown or rendered all but useless from the slovenly manner in which they are performed. It is in vain that one points out to the individual crofter how vastly he might better his condition at little expense beyond the labour of his own hands. He is too conservative to adopt any suggested change, or too gregarious to take any departure from the ways of his fellows. There is, doubtless, a good deal of point in the plea that he does not enjoy the security of a lease, and has, consequently, no guarantee that improvements effected by him may not at any time be used for the advantage of another. But after all is said, pro and con, in regard to amelioration of any kind, the question ever uppermost in the Lewis crofter's mind is,' Why ought he not to rest contented with the system, including in its entirety the huts and "lazy-beds" of his fathers ?' or, Why ought he to do differently from his neighbours ?'

Bitter complaints have been made of the taxes and imposts, civil and ecclesiastical, reckoned by many amongst the causes which have been at work for the last forty years in lowering the material condition of the Lewis crofter. These and such like causes have been, it is submitted, of comparatively minor force in
relation to the point at issue. In so far as injurious moral effects have been produced, to that extent it must be allowed that the causes referred to have
contributed to the social deterioration of the people; but the main factors in the process under consideration have been the two above stated—the subdivision
of the land lots, and the imperfect cultivation of the soil. For the first evil there appears to be a choice only of two possible remedies, viz.,
(a), As the leases of large tacks expire, let the people be spread over a greater extent of territory ; or,
(b), Let there be established a system of partial emigration, on such a scale and on such conditions as shall appear best to the wisdom and benevolence of those w h o may have it in their power to promote that mode of relief.

For the second evil, a double remedy seems to be required :
(a), Crofters' leases on reasonable terms as to rent and duration; and
(b), A sufficient infusion into the townships of persons who shall be thoroughly up to agricultural work, and show the native population ' how to do it'—how to treat their arable land—how to improve the breed of their live stock—how to build houses fit for human occupation.

The foregoing statement contemplates the crofter qua crofter pure and simple. No allusion has been made to fishing, because it is believed that fishing ursuits, so often superadded to the crofter's toils, are not often found compatible with the crofter's success in the pursuit of his proper calling.

JAMES STRACHAN

Appendix XXXII

2010-08-02T17:40:00.000+01:00

EMIGRATION FROM THE LONG ISLAND.
LETTERS of EMIGRANTS from the Property of Lady Gordon-Cathcart in the Long Island.

1.—From William M'Pherson, Benbecula Settlement, to his BROTHER

BENBECULA SETTLEMENT,
NORTH-WEST TERRITORY, 17th June 1883

DEAR BROTHER,—I know you are longing very much for a letter from me, but I was so very long in getting settled, and I did not like to write till I would be able to give you the address. Dear brother, I trust you are all well in health. I am thankful to say that we are both well and strong after our long journey, thanks be to the Giver of all blessings for his goodness to us.

Dear brother, in the first place I will give you a short account of our travelling. We were five days and five nights in the train from Quebec to Winnipeg. We stayed one night at Winnipeg ; we were another half day and night between that and Brandon, and we were a whole fortnight at Brandon, while MacDiarmid and John Macdonald were out here looking for the land. Then we came to Wapella. That is the nearest station to here. It is about a hundred miles west from Brandon, and about six or seven miles from here. We did not take the lakes, for they were blocked up with snow, but we got on all the way by the train for the same fare as by taking the lakes.

We took a whole week driving our things from Wapella to here with the oxen, and then we got settled, and we have been busy since ploughing and planting the potatoes. We are done putting out the seeds. Lachlan and I are ploughing together. We have only one team of oxen between us. We planted twenty-four bushels of potatoes, four bushels of oats, and two bushels of barley, between us. We are going to begin some kind of houses before we plough any more, and when the houses are finished we will begin breaking for next year.

Now I may tell you about the country. It is as beautiful a place as I have ever seen, and I think it is very healthy. It is not a bit hotter than at home. We have plenty of wood and water. We have fine weather, with heavy showers of rain.

Every one of us took oxen, cows, stoves, tents, and provisions from Brandon. I have two cows and two calves of my own. Dear brother, I may say that I am very well pleased with the place. I got enough of trouble before I got here, and I have plenty of work to do this year; but for all that, if God spare me my health, I don't mean to be the least sorry for coming here, unless something wrong comes in my way. I know I will be a great deal better here in a few years than at home.

Dear brother, I am very sorry indeed that you have not all come out with me. If you, and Donald, and Morag had come, we would have got three homesteads, and by taking one pre-emption we would have a whole section to ourselves; we would be settled together, and would be as happy as the day is long. Two of us would do all the work, or I should should say one of us and Morag would do, and the other two at work, and in a short time we would be very well off.

Dear brother, it makes my heart sore to think the way you two are working at home, and having so little thanks or comfort for it, when we might have been here very well and happy if you had come. Dear brother, I hope you will write soon, for I cannot tell you how we two are longing to hear how matters are with you. Be sure to write and tell us all, for it seems to us as long as ages to be so long without hearing from you. I hope Mary is better and at home with you before now. I know you have enough to do and to look after just now when Donald is away, but I think he will be at home before you get this.

The two of us send our dear love to you, dear brothers and sister, not forgetting Morag Veag and any other inquiring friends. Write soon. With love to you all—Your loving brother,
WILLIAM M'PHERSON.

P.S.—You may tell Mr MFadyen when you see him that I saw his brotherin-law when we were at Brandon. He is in good health and very well off. He got land five miles out of Brandon. John Ferguson from South Uist came out here last week. He is expecting to get the other half of our section. Tell me how the crops are looking. We have fine briard on what we sowed four days ago. The only thing we miss most from here is the church. There is no church at all here, but a missionary holds a meeting every second Sunday. There was nobody here when we came except two or three English settlers, but in another year I think it would be very hard to get even one half section.

Dear brother, I hope you will write soon. With kindest love from us both to you all, dear brothers and sister. W. M'P.

2.—From MARION M'PHERSON to MORAG VEAG.

MY DEAR MARION,—I was expecting to write to you many a time since I left, but I have not had much time for writing; besides, I know you were hearing everything from the letters we were sending home. Dear Marion, I don't need to give you the news of this country, as Norman will tell you all I have to say just now. William is always wishing that your mother and all of you were here, for you would get on far better than at home. Dear Marion, I hope you will write to me soon with all your news. This is a short letter, but the next one will be longer. I hope that Miss Ashley is still as kind to you as before. Tell me if you are hearing from Mrs Hadden, or how she is getting on. Give our kind love to your dear mother and family, to Mr and Mrs M'Rae and family, not forgetting yourself and Morag. Dear Marion, we miss you all very much indeed, but if God spares us all, perhaps we will see each other yet. Excuse this bad scribble, for I am in an awful hurry. Love to you, dear, from us both.
—Yours truly,
MARION M'PHERSON.

3.—From ALEXANDER M'PHERSON, Pipston, Wapella,
2nd July 1883

Mr Fyffe,

DEAR SiR,—I am going to enclose these lines to you, in order to let you know that I and Mrs M'Pherson and son, and all the rest of our party, are enjoying good health at present, as I wish that this may find you and family in the same state.

Now, in the first place, I have to tell you that we got a very good passage coming across the Atlantic. We were fifteen days in the boat coming across. We arrived at Quebec on 3rd May at 10 o'clock A.M., and proceeded on our far west journey at 5 o'clock the same day. We were in the train for five days and nights without an hour's rest until we arrived at Winnipeg on the 9th May, after having come 2000 miles by rail, and, believe me, we were quite tired of it. We stayed only a day at Winnipeg, and then we started west to another town, 132 miles distant, called Brandon. We stayed in that town twelve days, while the chief land surveyor and some of our party were away looking for good land for us. While they were away I bought my implements,—one pair of oxen at 200 dollars (4s. 2d. to a doRar); one cow, 75 dollars; one waggon, 75 dollars; one plough and harrow, 38 dollars; stove, with all its furniture, 30 dollars. Provisions and groceries are dear here, and it is no wonder, this is only a new country just started. I have to tell you that we are well pleased with our land. We have got plenty of good land, very good water, any amount of timber; also we are not under bondage to any man, as we have been in Benbecula.

I have also to tell you that I sowed twelve bushels of potatoes, four bushels of barley, half a bushel of white beans, carrots, onions, and turnips, and to look at them after coming up is a glory you would not believe, and we are thinking ourselves happy that we left Benbecula in time. I pity poor people that are labouring in the old country for merely nothing, when they could make a very good living here even with a day's wages, although they were not able to get implements for their land at the first start. But the most of the poor people would not be able to come here even although they were willing, the road is so long and the expenses heavy. We will be praising Lady Gordon Cathcart for ever for her kindness to us in applying to the Canadian Pacific Railway Company and to the Government for us, and also for the good assistance we got from her. But we had great trouble in getting the money after coming here. Things were dearer to us owing to the way we got it. All the money was sent to the Government agent in one lump to get implements for us with it, and the way it was paid away was ' You go out and buy, and I will pay the bill.' Now when you have no money in hand things are dearer. But that was not her fault. Now, dear sir, I hope that you will let me know all the news of the place. How are you all coming on since we left ? Let me know how my father and family are doing. Donald Macdonald is present, and sends his kind regards to you and Mrs Fyffe and family, also to Miss Kerr. He is to write to you and to Miss Kerr shortly.

You may tell John, my brother, if he is intending to come here this year, I will be well pleased. But he will get no land nearer to me than a mile and a half, and if that will be too far away, I will give him the size of his father a croft for ever for nothing, and I am sure that is more than what his father
could do.

The cause of my delay in writing to you and to others was because I did not know the address till lately, and at that time I was in a hury ploughing. Tell John, my brother, if he intends coming this year to write me, so that I can make some preparation for him. You will give my love to Michael Macaulay and to the tailor, and to all inquirers, also to my father and brothers. Mrs M'Pherson and myself join in sending you and family our kindest love.

my address is—Cnoc na Monic Farm, Pipeston Creek, Benbecula Settlement, Wapella, North-West Territory, North America.
It is called after my father's farm. Good-bye.
I remain, yours ever truly, ____
ALEXANDER M'PHERSON.

4.—From JOHN M'DONALD, Benbecula Settlement.
BENBECULA SETTLEMENT, WAPELLA STATION, C.P.R., N.W. TERRITORY, 7th July 1883.

DEAR SIR,—As I promised to let you know about this new country, I will send you this short note. I have to inform you that we are in good health, hoping this will find all friends enjoying the same blessings. You can understand that we was too late for tillage this season. We left Glasgow on the 19th April; fourteen days on the ocean passage, five days by rail from Quebec to Winnipeg, one day in Winnipeg, ten days in Brandon; we take another between the said villages and Wapella, and three days driving our luggage. The time ran to 27th of May before we commence to plant the potatoes, but the small portion of crops we plants is doing well, They promised us before we left that they appoint agent to select lands for our party. If the land was selected for us we was in good time for cultivation; but, in one way, no man is able to select land for another but the very m a n himself.

I understand that the land we had is very good,—it is suitable for corngrowing and stock-raising,—and also we have good bluffs of timber, but not much for use except fire and fencing, Many farmers here have to drive firewood for the distance of five to ten miles. We are getting tired gathering good logs for a house not more than half a mile of distance. The summer here is very pleasant—not so warm as we expect. We call it fine weather in the old country, but we don't use any flannel or drawers. But you will feel the weather warmer in the tents, and also, I believe, the winter is not so severe as they say.

About this country, you are not able to understand the beauty of the soil—all covered with long grass and every sort of flowers. Small ponds are very numerous, surrounded with long grass or small trees. Dogs of every description are very very abundant, the same as the dogs I left behind me. Any amount of rapits (rabbits), prairie hens—same as grouse, but a size larger—partridges, plovers, geese, cranes—and they are very large, and some elks—and they are as large as a cow, and saw some black bear. No gamelaw in this country; but we are busy, and not able to spend much time in sport till we get up our houses, but if I will spend a day, I will find enough to keep the pot going. I and M'Diarmid was yesterday driving timber, and I stating if we was at Benbecula market with our wagon and oxen that we would have more attendance then any whisky tent in the market. I believe you heard about the death of my Mary before. Everything must have his own end. Give my respects to unkle's family. Christy asks you to send your cards.

I must come to conclusion, and you must excuse hurry and errors. Write as soon as you will Rnd this, and I will answer any inquiry afterwards. Give our regards to M r M'Kay's family, and tell John that I was willing to write letters of him before this, but he must excuse me. I will be looking for his letter.
— I am, yours truly.

JOHN M'DONALD

5.—Copy LETTER from L. MATHESON, Benbecula Emigrant, to C. CAMERON,
Craegarry Farm, Benbecula.
BENBECULA SETTLEMENT,
NORTH-WEST TERRITORY, August 11th, 1883.

DEAR MR CAMERON,—You must excuse me for being so long in writing you, but I was waiting till I would be able to tell you the news of the country. In the first place, I am happy to say that I am well in health, and all my family and every one of my friends here, trusting to God you and all friends in like manner. I may tell you I am very well pleased with this place yet; as far as I can see, it is a real good country. Everything bad that we were hearing before we left was all lies. You haven't heard a single true word about it. The summer was not any hotter than at home. If the winter will be as favourable as the summer, we will be very lively. The weather was awfully fine all the time since we came. I haven't seen a single rainy day since we left the old country, but there is heavy showers some days. The crop is looking awful good. I haven't seen better looking corn and potatoes in my life. we are lifting the potatoes ; they were only eight weeks in the ground, and they are as big as I have seen in the old country two months after this, and as good. You won't believe the crop and the grass that is here, when you don't see it, but you may believe that I am telling the truth. I have some grass from three to five feet high for cutting, and there is good grass in every bit of it; it is the place for stock. I am done cutting the grass for winter. I have three stooks made ; they are as big as any you ever had. There is no trouble whatever in the grass here. we have only to cut it, and to put it in the stook the day after ; it needs no drying, because the weather is always dry. I have plenty of firewood and of water quite near hand ; there is firewood and water in every place here about, and plenty of land for tillage. I haven't seen the least thing to frighten me since I came, not even as much as an Indian. There is no wild beast here. The moskittes was pretty bad last month, but not much worse than the mitches when they are bad at home. I have seen no other bad flies. The nearest railway station is six miles from me, but as the people is flocking out here every week, I think the train will be coming nearer than that soon ; likely this place will be full in another year. When we came there was not a single house to be seen far or near, and I could scarcely count them to-day. They are coming up from Ontario and aR these places. I am sorry that my brothers hath not come with me, specially John and Malcolm, but I hope if anybody will come, they will come. They would do better here'in one year than three at home. You will ask them if they would let me know if they would like to come; and you will tell me true what they will say when you will write. You know that I would not ask them to come if I would think that letters of they would do better at home. Give my kindest love to all friends and Emigrants inquirers. Tell me if the Commissioners did any good. I read Mr Roderick's Long Island, speech in paper; I liked very well—Your truly friend,

LACHLAN M'PHERSON.
Address— Lachlan M'Pherson,
Benbecula Settlement,
North-West Territory,
Wapella Station, <
North America.
P.S.—I am sending you this for to see the money that is here. &—COPY OF LETTER from JoHN M'CORMICK, Benbecula Emigrant, to SALINA M'DoNALD, Benbecula.

WAPELLA STATION, August 20th, 1883.
SALINA MACDONALD,—In these few lines I took the opportunity of writing you to let you know I got your letter on 10th of August, in which I was very sorry to hear of your dear sister Marion. My mother was sick hearted when she heard of it, but glad that the rest of the family are all well in health ; the whole of our family are enjoying the same state of health since we came to this country. I must now state down so as to let you know some things about this country. According to my experience, I cannot see nor hear nothing that would keep back men that would be willing to come if they were able to come. we have the best climate that can be found, and healthy since I came, what we saw of the spring and all summer and autumn too. It is twice better than the climate we left after us ; the summer is dry every day, but I don't give any account of the winter yet, but I know that the men here will no be a day absent from work through the winter. There was three thousand persons working at the railway company last winter and not a day absent I will get work here through the winter myself too, and I expect to live only eight miles from home. My wages is different wages ; some days 9s. 6d., some days 7s., but the main ngure is 6s. a day, working only eight hours a day, some days five hours, and some days nine. There is no broken time ; although I woulden work but one hour I would get my day. Girl's wages is pretty well too, from three to four pound a month, and board, but land is the most best of all, it is far more profitable ; but I woulden want an empty family to come ; they should require to have £100 arriving in Winnipeg for their farm implements and house furniture. Ourselves are well pleased for our journey here. we are doing improvement on the land ; we have 16 acres ploughed ready for next year. We have 400 and 80 acres of the best land in the world. Our crop is looking splendid. we got up the winter home and stable for our cattle, but we expect to make a better house next summer if we'll be spared and well Will have not to plough in the spring time, nothing but to sow it and harrow it; no trouble in the world about it, no manure nor any else. we are expecting Mr Ranald Macdonald soon. Now I must conclude this. With all our best Letters of respects to you and to all the family,—I remain yours truly,

7-—Copies of Letters from LACHLAN M'PHERSON to his BROTHER and Mr CAMERON.
NORTH-WEST TERRITORY, MANITOBA,
24th August 1883.

DEAR BROTHER.—I have to mention you here in my letter that my family are in good health and arrived here safe. Now I hope you are in the same state of health too. Now I have to let you know that this place is the best place I ever saw for a farmer, and for labour too. But the thing of it to get to this place, freight is very dear, and implements either. Any family that ventures to this place must have a hundred pounds. Any strong family that would come here would be very happy. In a couple of years, 1883, with wages and labour. Wages is very high 8s. to 9s. a day, some labourers have 12s. Nothing is better than land. I would advise on every man in Uist to come to this place if they would possibly enough to come. I believe that you are very scarce of the fodder this year, and all the neighbours they are doing no use of the fodder here at all, but putting fire to it when it is mown, and the fruit taken off. All use growing grass in the winter time. But I hope that this distance is very long between this and Uist near 400,000 miles. Widow Nicholson if she would be here with her daughters, she would be as happy as the king. There is great desires for women here. No more to say at present, but my best respects to you and all acquaintances round. I and William M'Pherson are in share with each other in the oxen wagon and all. I bought a cow. John M'Donald, daughter died, little Mary. Best respects to all and to Neil Monk; best respects to Rod. M'Pherson, James M'Donald, Norman M'Donald.
LACHLAN M'PHERSON.

BENBECULA SETTLEMENT, NORTH-WEST TERRITORY,
1st August 1883.

DEAR MR CAMERON,—You must excuse me for being so long of writing to you, but I am waiting till I would be able to tell you the news of the country. In the first place, I am happy to say that I am well in health and all my family, and every one of my friends here, trusting to nnd you and all friends in like manner. I may tell you that I am very well pleased with this place yet; as far as I can see, it is a real good country, everything bad that we were hearing before we left was all lies. You haven't heard a single true word about it; the summer was not hotter than at home. If the winter will be as favourable as summer, we will be very lucky, the weather was awfully fine all the time since we came. I haven't seen a single rainy day since I left the old country, but there is heavy showers some days, the crops is looking awfully good, I haven't seen better looking com and potatoes in my life. we are lifting the potatoes, they were only eight weeks in the ground, and they are as big as I have seen in the old country two months after this and as good. You won't believe the crop and the grass that is here when yon don't see it, but you may believe that I am telling you the truth. I have some grass from 3 to 5 feet high for cutting, and there is good grass in every bit of it. It is the place for stock and not Creagory. I am done cutting the grass for winter. I have three stacks made, they are as big as any you ever had. There is no trouble whatever in the grass here, we have only to cut it and to put it in the stack the day after, it needs no drying because the weather is always dry. I have plenty of firewood and of water quite near hand. There is firewood and water in every place hereabout, and plenty of lands for tRlage. I haven't seen the least thing to frighten me since I came, not even so much as an Indian; there is no wild beast to be seen anywhere here. The muskettoes was pretty bad last month, but not much worse than the midges when they are bad at home. I have seen no other bad flies. The nearest railway station to here is six miles from me, but as the people is flocking out here every week, I think the train will be coming nearer than that soon likely. This place will be full in another year. When we came there was not a single house to be seen far or near, and I could scarcely count them to-day; they are coming up from Ontario and all these places. I am sorry my brothers have not come with me, especiaRy John or Malcolm, but I hope if anybody will come that they will come. They would do better here in one year than three at home. You will ask them if they would like to come, and you will
let m e know what they wRl say when you wRl write. You know that I would not ask them to come, I won't think they would do better at home. I heard that Mr Ranald Macdonald was on the way coming here. I don't know if it is true as for what he would be coming. Tell m e if the Commission did any good to the place. You will excuse bad writing,—Your truly friend,
LACHLAN M'PHERSON.
N.B.—Here is a sample of our current coin in this country, and drink m health for auld lang syne.
(This was a note for 25 cents.)

8.—REPORTS on the Crops grown in North-West Canada, by Emigrants from the Long Island.
DOMINION GOVERNMENT IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT,
BRANDON, MANITOBA, December 5th, 1883.

DEAR SiR,—I have great pleasure in forwarding to you a copy of report of the crops grown this year by the Lady Gordon Cathcart's colonists of the Benbecula settlement near Wapella, in the North-West territories of the Dominion of Canada. The original of which remains in the hands of Mr Donald Macdiarmid, and I am sure it will be read with much satisfaction by Lady Gordon Cathcart and yourself, and will, no doubt, give great encouragement to others of her people who are still at home in Scotland and the Scottish Isles, to come to this country, and make their future home's in the rich prairie lands of the North-West Provinces of the Dominion of Canada,—I am, Dear Sir, very truly yours,
THOMAS BENNETT,
Immigration Agent
W. P. Edwards, Esq.,
Edinburgh, Scotland-

October 27th, 1883.
DEAR SiR,—I have every satisfaction in sending a copy of the report of the Letters of Lady Gordon Cathcart settlers, at Pipestone Creek near Wapella to you, and I hope that friends and neighbours in the old country will reap the benefit of our Long Island report of this country in a few years. I am happy to say that the said party are well satisfied in this new country, and also that my reports in 1880, are now strongly supported by my own countrymen. Friends at home will now see that my object in wishing them to come to this country is just for their own benefit,
—I am, Dear Sir, yours very truly,
DONALD MACDIARMID.
THOMAS BENNETT, Esq.,

9.—REPORT of DoNALD MACDIARMID, showing the Average Production of Crops for 1883, in the Benbecula Settlement near Wapella, North-West Territory.
There is very little trouble in raising crops in this country. Have had none so far as my own personal experience goes. I have every confidence in recommending this country to intending emigrants from the West Highlands of
Scotland, and all parts of the old country. The climate is very healthy, far beyond the climate of Scotland. There is land here for the landless, and homes for the homeless, beautiful land of the setting sun.
Sect. 34, T. 13, R. 1, W . 2nd, P. M.
Potatoes, per acre 300 bushels, planted May 28th on the breaking.
Barley, „ 32 bushels, sown as late as June 28th on the breaking.
Oats, „ 40 „ „ „
Turnips, „ 300 „ „ „
DONALD MACDIARMID.

10.—REPORT of JOHN MACDONALD.
I am very well satisfied with my location, and wish that all my friends and neighbours had as good a footing as I have here. The longer I am here the better I like it. The climate is healthy, and the land good.
Sect. 4, T. 14, R, 1, W . 2nd, P. M.
Potatoes, per acre, 350 bushels, planted June 1st on the breaking.
Barley, „ 40 „ sown as late as June 28, on the breaking.
Oats, „ 50 „ „ „
Turnips, „ 300 „ „ „
DONALD MACDIARMTD.

11.—REPORT of ALEXANDER MACDONALD.
I am very well pleased with my farm, also with the climate, and very thankful that I left the poor old country. I am advising my friends at home to come as soon as possible to this beautiful land of the North-West-
Sect. 10, T. 14, R 1.
Potatoes, per acre, 200 bushels, planted in June.
Oats, ,, 56 „ sown „
Carrots and Onions very good.
ALEXANDER MACDONALD.

12.—REPORT of ALEXANDER MACPHERSON.
I am very well satisfied with my farm, and also greatly delighted with all
I have seen of the country. It is delightful in every respect, the soil is rich, black loam lying on top of clay and lime subsoil. Plenty of good water and timber, and I wish that all my friends were here.

Sec. 2, T. 14, R. 1.
Potatoes, per acre, 360 bushels, planted in June.
Oats, „ 40 „ sown „
Carrots and onions very good.
ALEXAXDEB MACPHEMON.

13.—REPORT of WILLIAM MACPHERSOM.
I am very glad I left Uist, and beg to thank all those that took any interest in taking the responsibility of getting us to this country. I have 160 acres of very choice land for the small sum of ten dollars, and now I would not take two thousand dollars for it.

Sect. 12, T. 14, R. 1.
Potatoes, per acre, 200 bushels, planted in June.
Barley, „ 40 „ sown „
Oats, , 40 „ „ „

WILLIAM MACPHERSON.

14.—REPORT Of LACHLAN MAcPHERSOW.
I am very well satisfied with my farm in every respect, also with the climate so far. We never saw weather at home like this, and my earnest wish is, that all my friends and neighbours in Uist were here in this beautiful farming country. The work is very easily .done, no manure required, such as in Lineclate.

Sect. 12, T. 14, R. 1.
Potatoes, per acre, 200 bushels, planted in June.
Barley, „ 40 „ sown „
Oats, ,, 40 „ „ „

LACHLAN MACPHERSON.

15.—REPORT of DONALD MACDONALD.
I am well pleased with my farm in every respect, and have every confidence in recommending this country to my friends at home. I hope they will make up their minds to come as soon as possible, the sooner the better. The longer I am here the better I like it. The climate is healthy, the weather very good, and there is no constable or groung officer. Make no delay in coming.

Sect. 6, T. 14, R. 33, W . 1st, M.
Potatoes, per acre, 150 bushels, planted in June (very careless).
Oats, ,, 35 „ sown „

DONALD MACDONALD, Esq.

16.—REPORT of RODERICK MACDONALD.
I am very well satisfied with my farm, and I would not go back to Uist although I would get £400 sterling, and all the property I left. I hope more of my friends at home will come as soon as possible.

Sect. 32, T. 13, R. 33, W . 1st, P. M.

Potatoes, per acre, 350 bushels, planted in June.
Barley, „ 28 „ sown „
Oats, „ 40 „

RODERICK MACDONALD.

17.—REPORT of ANGUS MACCoRMIC.
I am very glad for my change from the old Benbecula to the new Benbecula, in this beautiful far west country, of which we did not know anything until now. The only thing I feel sorry for is that I did not come here in my younger days, but, however, I feel glad to see some of my family in this good country, and hope the rest of them will soon come along with all my friends and neighbours. The climate isgood and healthy, and the land is to any man's satisfaction.

Sect. 2, T. 14, R. 1, W . 2nd, P. M.

Potatoes, per acre, 200 bushels, planted in June.
Barley, „ 40 „ sown „
Oats, „ 40 ,, „

ANGUS MACCORMIC.

Appendix XXXVI

2010-08-02T17:39:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by the Rev. RODERICK MACRAE, F.C. Manse Carloway, Lewis.

5th September 1883.

In compliance with the request of the Royal Commission, I have the honour to submit to you the following statements in reference to the condition and circumstances of the people of my congregation at Carloway.

I have been resident in Lewis for the last seven years, and beyond that period I cannot speak from personal knowledge of the state of the country, or the condition of the people. In my humble opinion the chief cause of the grievances of the Lewis people is general poverty, arising from overcrowding and the subdivision of crofts. Among small crofters it is found very dimcult to prevent subdivision, and though the present chamberlain is known to have done his utmost to prevent it, yet subdivision has been injudiciously allowed sometime or other to take place in Lewis to an injurious extent. Considerable curtailment of holdings without corresponding reduction of rent has also taken place by the formation of new crofts out of the common pasture land in connection with different townships. The result of this process has been the present overcrowding. Seeing then that the whole extent of pasture land available for crofts has been in the manner described already formed into new lots, one does not see how the overcrowding and smallness of holdings, of which the people have so much cause to complain, can be relieved or remedied under present arrangements in the Lewis. In these straitened circumstances the people naturally raise a cry about land under sheep and deer which they think should be distributed among the crofter population. It is doubtful, however, whether the amount of land under sheep and deer available for crofts would be found sufficient to accommodate the surplus population, or relieve the people's poverty to the extent required. Even should the big farms be set free, the crofters could hardly pay the rent which these yield, unless they were able to stock them, and work them as club farms.

The crofters' holdings are too small, and though the whole extent of their lots is cultivated minutely from year to year, it is only in exceptional cases that the quantity of grain and potatoes raised is found sufficient to support their families. In consequence of this incessant cropping, the soil of their crofts is gradually deteriorating.

The people are strong, healthy, and industrious, and if they had plenty of cultivable land to work upon, they should experience no difficulty in providing a comfortable and independent livelihood for themselves and families. They are also a well-behaving, orderly, and a strictly temperate class of people. Within my recollection there have been no acts of oppression in the Lewis. The people are generously and considerately treated by the estate, and in this respect they have less cause to complain than many others of their class in other parts of the Highlands.

By way of suggesting remedies for the grievances of the people, I would propose:

1st. Liberal encouragement by the Government for the better development of fishing industries of the island. Towards this end Government should give substantial assistance for the formation and building of harbours in all places in the island where such would be serviceable.

2nd. Encouragement by the Government for the establishment of fishing villages at suitable places, where the people could earn a comfortable livelihood independent of their crofts. In this way the present overcrowding would be relieved to a considerable extent, and accommodation, and remunerative employment provided for a large portion of the surplus population.

RODERICK MACRAE.

Appendix XXXV

2010-08-02T17:38:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by the Rev. MALCOLM M'RiTCHiE, Free Church Minister, Knock, Stornoway.

Knock,
August 1883.

Having been from home in ill health when your Honourable Commission appeared in the Island of Lewis, and thus unable to appear personally before you to give my estimate of the present state of Lewis, as compared with what I have known it to be, from a recollection of now close upon seventy years—having been born in Lewis in the year 1803, and since intimately acquainted with every part of it,—will your Lordship kindly allow me to submit the following statement bearing upon the condition of the island as a whole, as contrasted with what existed within my own memory; and also a more particular statement as to the condition of things in the parish of Knock, in which I have laboured for many years as a minister of the gospel, and at a former period as teacher.

I will also take the liberty of suggesting to your Lordship some of the remedial measures necessary for ameliorating the condition of the people.

My Lord, my recollections of Lewis go back for seventy years, and I well remember the comfortable circumstances of the large population that then inhabited my native parish of Uig. The population of the parish then would be about 3000, as against the present population of 3489 ; but how different the comfort and the circumstances of the population of sixty years ago ! All the people were then in a state of comparative comfort, having arable land, and hill pasture for sheep and cattle, whereas now poverty and want largely predominate. Increase of population cannot here be the cause of the immense difference in the condition of the people. The present population of 3489 is only some 448 more than that of fifty years ago, when the parish had a population of 3041, and when the circumstances of the people were much more comfortable. And this is so in the face of the large increase in the value of the fishing industry since 1831, affording a source of income to the people many times larger now than it was then. Why, then, the unfavourable condition of the people, as contrasted with their condition then ? Simply because the large reaches of pasture ground then in their possession have been taken from the people since, and are formed into sheep walks and deer forests, without any abatement of rents formerly charged; yes, with increase in many cases.

The value of his croft to the Lewis crofter depends largely upon the amount of grazing ground, and the number of sheep and cattle he can rear thereon. There are large portions of my native parish of Uig, where, in my boyhood, there were large populous townships of comfortable crofters, that are now all under sheep and deer, their former inhabitants driven away to foreign lands, or crowded upon other crofter townships. These townships had in my boyhood sheep and cattle in abundance, with full liberty to use to any extent the salmon that stocked the rivers so plentifully. These they preserved in large quantities for winter store, which, along with the produce of their land, flocks, and herds, and the abundant harvest of the sea, caused poverty and want to be unknown among them. These townships then suppned many a brave soldier to the ranks of the British army—among them several of my own near relatives — many of whom found a soldier's grave among the sands of Egypt, or the other battlefields of the Peninsular war. I do not know, my Lord, how many soldiers from Lewis are now serving in the ranks of Her Majesty's army, but the special reason for the smallness of the number must be sought in the state of vassalage and poverty in which the people have been kept for generations, undermining the spirit of enterprise and patriotism which formerly animated them. Unknown to the proprietor, who seldom resided among them, they became the victims of petty officials, who tyranised over them without any real regard for the moral and material interests of the people, who believed themselves to be entirely in their power. It is no small wonder to see what the people still are, for morally and physically they will bear comparison with any similar class of crofter peasantry in the world. As one who has conversed with old and venerable men, whose evidence, added to my own recollections, can go back more than a hundred and fifty years of the history of Lewis, I must testify to the high character my countrymen of the past bore for moral worth and honesty, as well as for parental and fraternal affection, and hospitality to strangers.

Much has been said of the large sums spent by the late Sir James Matheson on Lewis in improvements. Large sums were indeed spent, but much of it in mere experiments which resultedrin no permanent good,—such as the expensive experiments at Loch Ganavich, the paraffin works at Garrabost, &c. Had part of the sums so spent been applied to the improvement of the crofters' dwellings, and for piers and harbours for the better development of the fishing industry, the results to the welfare of the people, and the interests of the estate, would be very different now from what they are. After all the money spent, the fact still remains painfully evident that the condition of the people now is worse than when Sir James Matheson bought the estate. The whole tenor of the management has been all along rather to discourage than to encourage the crofter. Were it not for the fishing, the crofter population could not subsist upon their smaR allotments of the soil, and that generaRy the poorest and the worst For, the close upon 23,000 of the crofter population in Lewis pay only about £8200 of the £20,000 rental yielded by the island, while the other £12,000 are paid by a few large farmers and sportsmen. The soil in possession of the large farmers is by far the best in Lewis, and yields, considering its quality, a far lower rent than the portion in possession of the crofters. The best of the land was taken for the purpose of forming those large farms, and the crofters were driven from them, and huddled together on inferior ground, or sent away (as many of them were) to other parts of the world. This was done without any compensation, or consideration for their own and their forefathers' labours in bringing the soil to the state of cultivation in which it was when they were forced from it. All the land now in possession of the large farmers in Lewis, with the exception of what was reclaimed by the late Sir James Matheson, had been reclaimed by the forefathers of the present crofter population, without any cess that I know of to the proprietor. That being the case, is it just or fair, my Lord, that a few strangers should possess more than half the soil, and that the best of it, mostly for rearing sheep and cattle, while the descendants of the original possessors, a race of hardy and industrious men and women, are crowded together on the most sterile portions of the soil

But that is the present state of Lewis, and it is not possible to keep the rising generation—with their growing intelligence and information as to what is right and wrong in this matter, and encouraged by the sympathy their cause evokes in many quarters—from considering this state of things a grievous injustice, and entertaining a sense of wrong which may be found in the future far more troublesome than it has yet been, unless some remedy is applied. I will now humbly call your Lordship's attention to the remedies which, while largely ameliorating the condition of the people, will not injure, but rather enhance the interests of the proprietor.

Remedies

First.—The people must have more land, if their present condition is not to deteriorate into something worse. In saying this I am far from wishing that the system of middle-sized farms should be discontinued, except when the absolute necessities of the population demand the change. These always existed in the Highlands alongside of the crofter population, and the influence of the one class of tenants upon the other had always been beneficial. They were generally a hardy, intelligent, and patriotic race—very superior to the race of large sheep farmers who displaced them. Many of the latter were as void of patriotism as of generous interest in their poorer neighbours. In many instances they are non-resident in the country-sides they rent, and have no further interest in the place and people than what concerns their own individual advantage. These ought to give way wherever there is a population requiring to be accommodated with land ; while, out of these large tracts now under sheep, small farmers could also be accommodated, as well as a crofter population. There is enough land in Lewis—with which I am now more immediately concerned—to accomplish both these objects. Let me begin with the quoad sacra parish of Knock. In that parish there are the following townships,
with the specified number of crofters and cottars in each, viz.:—

(1.) Portnaguiran, 30 crofters, 9 cottars = 39 families
(2.) Portvallar, 18 crofters, 18 cottars = 36 families
(3.) Aird, 28 crofters, 31 cottars = 59 families
(4.) Sheshadder, 20 crofters, 12 cottars = 32 families
(5.) Shader, 28 crofters, 11 cottars = 39 families
(6.) Garrabost, 69 crofters, 17 cottars = 86 families
(7.) Bayble—Upper and Lower, 100 crofters, 37 cottars = 137 families
(8.) Swordle, 27 crofters, 15 cottars = 42 families
(9.) Knock, 30 crofters, 15 cottars = 45 families
(10.) Branahnie, 22 crofters, 10 cottars = 32 families
(11.) Melbost, 27 crofters, 8 cottars = 35 families

In all, 582 families, of whom no less than 183 are cottars, or families without land, except any small portion which they may have from the crofters. On many of the crofts—originally small enough for one family—there are now located in many instances two families, and in not a few cases three families. Of the 399 crofters in this parish very few pay £4, or upwards of £4, while 183 cottars have no land at all, except through the subdivision of these small crofts. Is there any way, then, in which the overcrowded state of this parish can be remedied ? Within the parish itself there is not certainly sufficient land to give a good-sized croft to each of these 183 cottars, while doing justice to the original crofter population. But many of the people now in the parish of Knock are the children of parents driven in past generations from other parishes in the island to make room for sheep and deer; and that fact should be taken into account in getting land for their accommodation. If there is not enough land in the parish of Knock, there is plenty of land in other parts of the island now lying fallow. In the parish itself, however, there is the farm of Aignish, now under sheep, and it is by far the best arable land in the whole parish. On that farm rushes and ferns largely cover parks once yielding splendid returns of every kind of crop. That farm might accommodate some thirty families, and being contiguous to the sea, is admirably suited for the class of crofter fisher population that inhabit that district. And surely, my Lord, to make comfortable homesteads for some thirty families of the sturdy, hardy fishermen of the parish of Knock is of greater importance than the grazing of a few hundred sheep. This farm yields for grazing purposes now a rental of £110, whereas thirty crofters might pay a larger rental, and be comfortable on the produce of these crofts, along with that of the fishing industry. There is no use in giving very large crofts to fishermen, because they cannot manage them well without interfering with their fishing operations.
Contiguous to the parish of Knock, if not partly within it, are the two farms of Holm and Melbost, paying an aggregate rental of £291, which, along with the above-named farm of Aignish, could accommodate more than the whole surplus cottar population of the parish of Knock, and they could and would, under proper arrangement, pay a larger rental than the present. There would still remain, near the town of Stornoway on every side, nine large farms of an aggregate rental of £905, along with twenty-two larger or smaller parks or farms in the hands of single individuals, of an aggregate rental of £214. There is, therefore, plenty of land in or near the parish of Knock to give a fair croft to every family, and leave still a number of small farms and parks for all the wants of such a population as occupy the town of Stomoway. The land, however, should be given under such conditions as to occupancy and cultivation as will guard for the future against the evils which have crept in under the present system. There should be leases given of reasonable length, and every encouragement given for the improvement of the soil. Under such leases it should be a condition—(a), that a house, barn, and byre suitable to the holding should be erected—a model plan for such being supplied by the estate, and Government or the estate supplying at moderate interest the money necessary—to be payable, interest and capital, within a certain number of years. To those capable of erecting such buildings at their own expense, there should be the promise of compensation at the end of the lease, if under the necessity of removing. (b), It should be a condition that special attention be given to the cultivation, feeding, and improvement of the soil, (c), It should be a condition that all subdivision should be strictly prohibited, as well as the housing of more than one family on the holding. The rising generation should be made to keep the prospect before them, that as they settle down in life, as many as the land will not properly maintain must make homes for themselves elsewhere. This would largely correct the evil of early marriages, and also direct the attention of many of the young to the propriety of acquiring some trade or profession, or of emigrating to the wide and inviting fields of our colonial empire. It might also lead many to the naval and merchant shipping service.

Under the present state of things there is no proper directing of the energies of the rising generation, and as a result they marry young, and settle—or
rather huddle together—in their present miserable surroundings. But were the land given on such conditions as the above, and the people made to feel that they have a real interest in the soil, I am firmly convinced that the whole aspect of things would undergo a complete transformation in a few years, while
the interests of proprietor and people would be better secured than by the present system.

The remarks under this head applicable to the parish of Knock are equally applicable to the other parishes in the island. Lochs, with its large population, has within its boundaries ten farms, the rents of which amount to £1349, or within £340 of half the rental derived from land over the whole parish. The whole rental of the parish, according to the valuation roll of 1871, is £4320, 17s. 10d. But of that sum £947 odds are drawn from shootings, salmon fisheries, and feu-duties, leaving £3373, 17s. 10d. as the rental from land, of which the above ten farmers pay £1349, leaving only £2024 to the whole crofter population of thousands of people. Surely, my Lord, this is an unfair division of the soil. The farm of Park alone would supply all the cottar population with land, and would, under a fair arrangement, pay a higher rent than the farmer, while the shootings would be in no way deteriorated.

The same thing is true of the parish of Uig, but in a more aggravated form. The whole rental of that parish is £3771, 10s. 6d, which, after deducting £926, 8s. 6d. for shootings and salmon fisheries, leaves £2845, 2s. as rental from land, of which fourteen individuals and the proprietor pay £1577,12s. 6d., leaving only £1267, 9s. 6d. as the portion of the thousands of the crofter population ! Is it any wonder, my Lord, that the condition of the people is such as it is, when the division of the land is so inequitable ? The same thing is true, but to a more limited extent, of the parish of Barvas, and to the part of the parish of Stomoway immediately adjoining. In both of them there is sufhcient land for all the crofter population, while leaving a margin for a few middle-sized farms.

Secondly
Another improvement that would largely benefit such a population as occupy Lewis, depending, as they do, so much upon the fishing industry, would be the making of suitable harbours in the island. The fishing industry has never been developed to the extent to which it could easily and profitably be developed. The want of harbours in suitable centres has mainly hindered this development. There has no proper attention been given to a close time for the herring fishing ; the best kind of boat and rig for the ling and cod fishing; and several other points in connection with this industry. The forming of a few harbours cannot fail to give a very great stimulus to this industry, and add to the comforts of the people, as well as to the food supply of the kingdom.

Two places in the parish of Knock are specially adapted for such harbours, viz., Bayble and Portnaguiran. Harbours could easily be made in both places, and both are most conveniently situated for the herring nshing, and also for the winter and spring fishing. Of all places in the island Loch Roag would be the most suitable and safe for a harbour on the most extensive scale. It would be large and safe enough for the whole herring fishing fleet engaged from Barra Head to the Butt of Lewis. Many disasters have taken place among the fishing population for want of these harbours. Within the last fourteen years forty fishermen belonging to my own congregation met their death by drowning, many of them within sight of their homes and friends, who are thus saddened, and discouraged in the prosecution of their calling.

Much, and at no very great outlay, could in this way be done for the population of Lewis, and for the better development of an industry so important to the nation. I have thus, my Lord, gone rapidly over the most of Lewis, pointing to some things that ought to be remedied, and the remedies that should be applied in justice to the people. I believe the application of these remedies would prove as beneficial to the proprietor as to the people. Many of the burdens imposed by the present condition of the people would be removed, or greatly lightened. Poverty WGuld become less common, and hence poor-rates lighter ; rents would be more punctually paid, and the whole tone and condition of the people would be elevated. It should also secure a contented and industrious population on the sea border, plying with more energy and success than ever their fishing operations, and pouring still larger supplies of so necessary an article of food as fish into our large towns and cities. It would also secure a basis of supply of the best possible element to meet the requirements of our army and navy, of our merchant shipping, and the many industries of our large towns and cities. And where could we get better materials for all these than fioni among such a people ? Nor do we know how soon the need of such an element may be felt, and the folly seen of giving up to sheep walks and deer forests the homes and lands once possessed by our brave Highlanders.

MALCOLM MACRITCHIE

Appendix XXXIV

2010-08-02T17:37:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT of Rev. ANGUS MACIVER, Uig Manse, Stornoway.

Uig MANSE, STORNOWAY,
11th May 1883

As a native of Lewis, and for the most part resident on the island, and taking a deep interest in the welfare of the people, I beg respectfully to submit some of the views I entertain as to the state of matters here, and the reforms necessary for the consideration of the Royal Commissioners. I am intimately acquainted with every part of the island, know a very large proportion of the people, their habits, and ways of thinking, and have a very good idea of their circumstances in general, besides having a very extensive knowledge of the Highlands and Islands, and a residence of nine months in Canada, travelling westward some 1200 miles, and living for the most part in the houses of Highland settlers. I mention these facts simply to let the Commissioners know that I cannot at any rate plead ignorance, or that I had not advantages and means for making up my mind in some way as to the question which now occupies the mind of the Commissioners, and on which Parliament, I hope, will soon legislate.

It is evident to any one who knows the real state of the Highland crofters that the Commission has not been appointed a day too soon. In many places matters have been getting into a dangerous state. This, I should think, will be pretty apparent to the Commissioners before they are through their work. On coming to this island a few things will strike the Commissioners at once, as, for instance, the poverty of the soil, the large population, the wretchedness of their dwelling-places, and to account for the fact of their remaining and living in such circumstances. The fact, however, is undoubted that things are, in many respects, becoming worse and worse with the people, and at the present rate are bound to come to a crisis at no distant day, unless some remedy is devised for averting it. The primary causes for the present state of things are the state of the land laws, too many of the people crowding into narrow and poor parts of the land, the want of tenure of the land, the want of interest in the people on the part of proprietors, and the want of education. The people naturally and morally are capable of becoming one of the finest class to be met with anywhere.

Take, for example, the people of this island, and before they can be made anything like comfortable as crofters they will require every inch of land on the estate at very moderate rents. They have sunk so low as to material resources and comforts, and in the independence of m m d that ought to characterise them, that it will take some time to raise them to the true ideal of manhood. They have been living hitherto on the borders of starvation, and absolute dependents on the will of others. I hold that the people had no hand in bringing themselves to this state. They have been helpless all along. Fifty or forty years ago they were quite comfortable and able to live well, but now they find it very dimcult to make a bare living. The population has increased enormously for the last forty years, and instead of the proprietor seeing to the comfort of these people by giving them more lands, they have just been deprived of them in proportion to the increase, and these made into sheep farms and deer forests. The result now is a congestion of population in the various districts where they reside. And, unless a very decided change takes place soon, a chronic state of destitution will be the consequence. The small patches of land the people occupy are divided and subdivided, so that there are very few of the original lots but are now in this condition. Both the proprietor and crofters have been at fault in this. The crofter would naturally permit his son to build a house on his lot, as he was powerless to do anything else for him, and hence the reason on his side for the subdivision. All the son's hard earnings up to the time of marriage went to support his father's family, to pay the rents, &c. He could not lay by any of his earnings to start for himself anywhere else. There is no use saying, Why would not these sons shift for themselves, and leave the father on the lot? One of the reasons is because the son sees it would be unfair to leave his father in old age to struggle with poverty and inability to pay his way after he had done so much for him. The obligation is strong on both sides. I believe this operates powerfully with the poor people here. Although they are poor, they have a sense of honour, and wish to perform their respective duties to one another as far as they can. Poverty and a sense of dependence on one another have been, I believe, the main reason, though not the exclusive one, for the great increase of population in this island. Other reasons are the isolated position of the island and hitherto the want of the English language. Perhaps there is no other part of the Highlands where Gaelic is so universally spoken. These, as far as I can make out, are the principal reasons for the present unfortunate position of matters.

I maintain that there are plenty of lands in Lewis to make the present crofters and squatters, as they are called, comfortable, provided they get them all on easy terms; but not otherwise. I mean, of course, what there is of arable land and grazings. My decided opinion is that they should all have lots ranging from £5 to £7 . The lands are so poor that the lots must be adapted to the circumstances of the people and the nature of the soil and climate. They should have what would afford them some comfort and leave them independent of others. It is quite evident that there is no other class of people who can make the same use of the soil as the natives themselves, if they are properly encouraged. And I say further, with the greatest confidence, that, poor though the island be, under a good land law there will be found in another generation a perfectly comfortable and respectable class of crofters in this island as will be found anywhere in Britain. They are naturally shrewd and intelligent, and their moral character stands high. Some people say, supposing they got the lands, the same 6tate of things would recur by and by, and the danger would necessarily be increased when there was no outlet for the surplus population. My answer to this is twofold. First, any new legislation on the subject would need to provide against subdivision of lots; but, secondly, I maintain, although there was no such provision, that the young people will, in a very short time, begin to move off to other and better parts of the world. If the Education Act is worked properly, the rising generation will have their eyes opened to see that there are better places in the world to live in than these, and they will spontaneously move off to other countries. While my convictions are very strong and decided as to the influence of education on the rising generation, I have equally strong opinions as to the necessity at time of encouraging and strengthening them for free and voluntary emigration. Education of itself will not effect the needed reform.

There must be means for enabling them to carry out their wishes and intentions. Parents and children having the means at command will see the necessity and utility of doing as is done in other parts of the world. Combine education and material comfort, and it solves any difficulty that may now exist or may be supposed to exist hereafter. Highlanders, as you all know, have force of character that will enable them to make their way anywhere, provided they get equal chances with others. In illustration and proof of the soundness of the view I now express on this subjeet, I may mention to the Commissioners that I taught a school in my present parish upwards of twenty years ago. The children were well grounded in the principles of education. I mind on coming back to the parish a few years ago that there were very few of them to be met with here now ; the most of these boys are away to other parts of the world, and some of them making fortunes. When I inquire how they managed to get away, I find that they have been almost all taken in hand by some one, and those who were not have settled down as crofters and fishermen. I mention this fact to show that education of itself is ineffectual.

I always recommend to as many as can emigrate to do so, for the circumstances of the colonists are far beyond anything that can be met with among crofters in the Western Highlands. There is no comparison between them in any respect. Many of those colonists who are now in comfortable circumstances suffered great hardships after arriving in America, and I have no doubt, from the accounts given to me by many of themselves, that a number of those who were sent away died from sheer want. The hardships encountered by those who left the country have had a great deal to do with discouraging those who remained behind from attempting to follow them. As far as I can make out, it is quite hopeless to think of getting these people to emigrate at this stage, and it would be very wrong to bring any pressure to bear upon them for that end. They cannot afford it on account of their poverty and destitution, and one would incur a serious responsibility who would attempt it in the present condition of the people. Let the best that can be done for them in their native land be done in the first instance, and when all the means at the disposal of the country are exhausted, it will be time enough then to try the expedient of sending them to other lands. In the meantime, I cannot see that there is any necessity for attempting anything of the kind. Let there be a proper and equitable distribution of the land, and the social position of the people will come all right.

If the people of this island are to have any benefit from legislation about the lands, it is out of the question to think that they can afford to give the present rents for them. I understand the rents have been doubled for the last forty years by reason of sports and other causes which may readily occur to the Commissioners. What reduction there should be is not for me at present to say, as the Commissioners will see for themselves the nature of the soil and the state of the country. They will not traverse any part of the Highlands so poor as the most of it.

A most important part of any reform that is to be effected in this island must have reference to the dwelling-places of the people, and it has been hitherto surrounded by many difficulties, as, for instance, the want of leases or proper hold of the land, the fear of being evicted from their houses, the want of timber and material for building better ones. Within sight of where I am writing, the poor people, forty years ago, built at their own expense and by their own labour, houses according to plans and specifications drawn out by order of the proprietor and immediately after they were finished, they were sent away to Canada without getting any compensation. While they were endeavouring to carry out these plans and specifications, they supported themselves and families on shell-fish. Dealings with the people, such as I now describe, have militated very much against any improvements that might have been effected in this direction. They have not been encouraged, but I should rather say discouraged. I know in the case of my own parishioners that they are sensible of the backward way in which they stand in this respect, and many of them have improved their houses lately, and I know that they are all anxious to have them in a better state. At the present rate of progress, however, it will take generations to see them anything like what they ought to be. Some means must be adopted to bring about a decided reform as to houses in Lewis ; for as matters stand now, they are simply actionable on the grounds of sanitary law.

There is a notion prevalent with some, viz., that the people, or at least many of them, should become exclusively fishermen, and that this would leave them better off than they are at present. I wish very strongly to impress upon the Commissioners the folly of this view, and the danger of entertaining it. The herring fishing is carried on for two months of the year on the east side of the island. During the remainder of the year the native population prosecute the ling fishing exclusively. I should also mention that for two or three months in the year they go as hired men to the east coast herring fishing. The principal fishing in Lewis, however, is the ling fishing. It is plentiful around the island in winter and spring, but the sea is so rough and boisterous that they can very seldom get out, and they are considered the boldest and best of fishermen. They will stand out to sea when east coast fishermen, with better crafts, will make for the land. This year they have been anxiously waiting to get to sea, and for seven months they have been unable to do anything. During the most of that time the east coast fishermen have been able to prosecute the fishing. The sea around Lewis and the fishing ground are quite different from those on the east coast. The fishing can never be much more than merely a help to the people. They won't live by it alone. Besides the distance from the market will always leave the people at a disadvantage. Good harbours are much needed in different parts of the island.

In case I may not have an opportunity of meeting with the Commissioners when they come to the island, I wish to lay before them the foregoing statement of my views on the subject. I have no doubt the Commissioners have long ere now thought over all the points bearing on the settlement of the question in general; but as their duty now calls them to hear all that may be said on the subject, I trust you will excuse the length of this letter. And if there should be anything in it that may be of help to the poor people, and to facilitate your investigations, I shall be much pleased.

As to the mere details of grievances, the crofters themselves will give you plenty of them in the various districts of the island through which you will
pass. ANGUS MacIVER.

P.S.—I read the foregoing statement to a committee of crofters here, and they agree with the views expressed. A. MacIVER.

Appendix XXXIII

2010-08-02T17:36:00.001+01:00

STATEMENT by the Rev. John A. MACRAE, Minister of North Uist.

NORTH UiST, 31st July 1883.

I am of the decided opinion that if fhe crofters' holdings were extended they would be in a position to support themselves and their families in an easier manner than they are now capable of doing according to the present division of the land, and more particularly if leases were granted to them of ten or twelve years, on certain conditions of improving the land by way of draining and making enclosures, which I feel confident would induce the crofters to improve their holdings, and consequently their own circumstances; for it stands to reason, that land cultivated year after year does not yield the same quantity or quality of crop that it would do by bringing it into cultivation by a regular system of rotation.

I would also suggest that the pendicles or hill grazings that were attached to several of crofters' farms should be restored to them, of which they were deprived many years ago. I m a y mention some of these hill grazings which were held at one time by some of the townships in my own immediate neighbourhood, viz., Loch Eport side was equally divided between the farms of Knockline, Balemore, and Knockintorran; the hill of Birenal belonged to the farm of Houghary ; the hill of Langash to the farms of Tigheary, and Hosta Sponish (Loch Eport) to the farm of Baldoch ; Breanish to the farm of Balmartin ; Carnish to the farm of Baldone ; and Arighochdan to the farm of Scolpeg. All these hill grazings have been added to sheep farms; and I hold that, by restoring these several hill grazings to the crofters' farms I have mentioned, would not only prove to be a great boon to the poor crofters, in so far as it would enable them to keep more stock, particularly sheep and young cattle, but it would also put them in an independent position to maintain themselves and their families in the event of a failure of their crops. Another system that has been largely countenanced by Highland proprietors is the letting of farms to non-resident tenants, from which great evils have arisen, and that consists of good farm-houses now occupied by uncultivated menials, instead of gentlemen and their families, who possessed these farms at one time, and who were not only an acquisition to society, but a great credit to the country at large.

JOHN A. MACRAE.

Appendix XXXI

2010-08-02T17:35:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by the Rev. DONALD MACINTOSH, C.C., Benbecula.

BENBECULA, SOUTH UIST, LOCHMADDY,
8th October 1883.

I came to South Uist in 1861; I was six years in the Boisdale district, ten years in Iochdar, and for the last six years in Benbecula.

When I came to the country the clearances in 1851, and the emigration, forced in some cases with circumstances of shocking inhumanity, were fresh in the memory of old and young. The measure by which, in or about 1846, several townships in South Uist and Benbecula were despoiled of their hill pendicles was also well remembered, and is well remembered still by the old people.

In the evidence given by the crofters' delegates before the Royal Commission at Lochboisdale and Benbecula, there was nothing regarding the doings in 1851 and the previous years that I did not hear long ago in every part of the parish from the Sound of Barra to the North Ford To say, as has been said, that they only repeated the lesson taught them by agitators, means saying that they learned the lesson long years before agitators or a Royal Commission to inquire into their grievances were dreamt of. They did not exaggerate. Indeed, in describing things that happened in those times, to exaggerate would not be easy. In their evidence relative to later grievances they were in all cases within the truth.

Those charged with the estate administration in my time were not to be blamed for the old grievances, nor for such of the later grievances as followed necessarily from the old. They did their best, according to their own ideas, of what was best under the difficult circumstances in which they were placed. There were harsh doings occasionally, specimens of which have been brought under the notice of the Royal Commission. These things were looked on as matters of course ; the factor's will was law. Any attempt at undoing the wrong committed in 1851 and previous years was not thought of. The emptied townships remained empty, returning gradually to a state of nature, and the people were left huddled in congested places.

At length, six years ago, it was announced that the crofter population was to be put on a satisfactory footing. The plan adopted differed from the old crofters' system in this, that what land a man was to have he would have together; there was to be no common. The land was to be surveyed, revalued, and redistributed. Every m a n was to have a lot at a fair rent. Leases were to be given. This plan was carried out in Benbecula in 1879-80. Being only three years in operation, it is perhaps too early to draw conclusions, but for one thing the crofts in most cases are too small. The few who have 32 to 40 acres can be comfortable. Most of the crofts are, I should say, under 25 acres. Some are very small, and poor creatures who have but a few acres of bad land cannot in the most favourable seasons rise much above the confines of destitution. The great want, however, is that of hill pasture for change of grass and water for the cattle in summer. The rent is fair; the proprietrix encourages and assists on favourable terms, the building of improved dwellings; a number of neat thatched and not a few slated cottages have sprung up within the last three years. In this respect the appearance of the island is changing very much for the better.

It has been said that the only large farm in Benbecula is nearly double the rent it was in 1836, while the rent of the crofters is less than it was at the same date. It was surely somewhat unfair to compare things so dissimilar, leaving an inference to be drawn unfavourable to the crofters. I suppose the rent of farms is regulated by the market. Prices of sheep and cattle have risen very much, perhaps nearly doubled since 1836. Not so the price of kelp, on which the rent of crofts was based. When the croft system was introduced in the early years cf this century, kelp was worth £3 per ton to the crofter, how much to the proprietor I know not. The rent of the croft was paid in kelp. The price of kelp kept falling, until the manufacture of it was interrupted for some years after 1851. Yet its money equivalent when its price was high remained as the rent of the crofts, with few exceptions, till the revaluation in 1879-80. What wonder then if the rent rose in the one case and fell in the other? It has been also asserted that the said farm is less extensive now than in 1836. However that may be, it absorbed the hill pendicles taken from Balvannich and Dungannach in or about 1846, and seven crofts with their pertinents from the township of Aird in or about 1851. As no one in Benbecula knows of any lands taken from this large farm to balance these acquisitions, how the assertion can be made good is not apparent.

The Catholics of South Uist have a grievance in connection with the education question. It is well known that the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of the island of South Uist are Catholics. In five of the South Uist Board Schools Catholic children are in a large majority; in the sixth (Eriskey) I do not think there is a single non-Catholic child. Yet we have not succeeded in getting a Catholic teacher into any of the schools. Our legal right is denied, and because we do not acquiesce in the denial, we are accused of stirring up religious animosity; of muddling the water while we have to drink far down the stream. There has been no contested School Board election as yet. We have refrained from bringing on a contest for the sake of peace, which we are after all blamed for disturbing. Our legal disabilities have been removed. Should our social disabilities continue ?

DONALD MACKINTOSH, C.C.

Appendix XXX

2010-08-02T17:34:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by the Rev. ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, Roman Catholic Priest of Bornish, South Uist.

In accordance with the wish expressed in your circular, received sometime back, I hereby send you a statement of some of the facts which occurred in the island of South Uist relative to the treatment received by the people from the hands of the proprietors (perhaps, speaking more correctly, from the hands of their representatives, the factors). Several changes came under my observation in the island, and I am sorry to say that these changes were not for the best. I am a native of the island, and between sixty-three and sixty-four years of age. I saw a class of comfortable tenants in the farms of Ormilate, Lower and Upper Bomish, Kildonan, Milton, North and South Frobosts. All these tenants were evicted at different periods from their land and sent to America, and the few of them who managed to get a footing in the country, were either removed to some moorland or distributed amongst the other crofters, which, in many cases, necessitated the division of crofts, as well as the allotment into new crofts of the land they held in common—land which they themselves and their ancestors formerly reclaimed from its primitive and wild state. Besides this common land, reclaimed and reduced into a state of cultivation, they had a wide range of hill pasture, of which they were also deprived, with the exception of a small and insignificant portion. On these hill pastures a great many sheep were reared, by means of which the owners were supplied with plenty of wool, which they manufactured into good and comfortable home-spun cloth. Now, having been deprived of this source of comfort, they must have recourse to the merchants for their cloth, or else buy their wool from the tacksmen, which comes to a serious item of expenditure in the household of a poor man with a numerous family. It was not only their sheep stock, but also their yeld cattle, and colts were grazed on the said hilly pasture. It was also the universal custom amongst them to return to the glens with their milch cows during so many weeks in summer, and upon their return home at the end of that period, the grass on the crofts and land in common was so abundant and plentiful that their cattle were well fed. Thus they had plenty of milk, cheese, and butter. But now the case is the reverse ; having to keep their cows for the most part of the year on their crofts, the quantity of milk is scarce, and the quality less nutritive. There is another serious complaint amongst the people, which is that the deprivation of the hill pasture and of the land in common caused no abatement of rent; for they are still charged the same amount of rent as they were when they had these in their possession. I remember, likewise, that there was a great deal of barley grain exported from this island, but now since these unfortunate changes alluded to took place, almost every sort of prosperity has declined. The people must depend either upon the proprietor or upon the merchant for the necessary supply of meal. The late proprietors always kept a store of meal in the country, and allowed no one to suffer the pangs of hunger. They received payment for the meal in question in kelp. Now kelp manufacture is discontinued and the usual supply of meal is stopped, which sinks the people deeper and deeper in the debt of the merchants. Upon the whole, I find that the people were attached to the Gordons, but they were absentees, and had in consequence to depend upon their factors for the management of their property.

So they lay the blame at the door of these unfeeling factors for the changes of which they complain. And certainly it must be owned that they proved themselves to be anything but favourable to the poor people of South Uist. Such changes for the worse cannot with any degree of truth and justice be attributed to the present proprietrix, Lady G. Cathcart; they took place many years before she got possession of the property. Neither do I think that her ladyship has it in her power at present to remedy the existing state of matters, because these farms I mentioned above as being formerly in possession of the people, are occupied by tacksmen, who, I am sure, are noways disposed to relinquish or to give up their leases. There is no one amongst the inhabitants of Uist who blames her ladyship, and I acknowledge with pleasure her kind and benevolent disposition. I know for certain that she on several occasions went personally to see the sick and infirm, and at the same time liberally administered to their comfort. I am equally aware that in some cases blankets and beds were given to the sick and destitute. These are traits of benevolence in her ladyship's character which I have great pleasure in stating, because I know them to be true, and it is but justice that she should receive credit for her kindness and good actions. The only remedy, in my humble opinion, for this state of affairs in South Uist, is to give the people more land (when such a step is practical), and at the same time to restore to them the hill pasture. If this plan is followed, I am convinced that their former prosperity will return, and that the tenants at the same time can afford to give the present amount of rent paid by the tacksmen. I by no means wish to insinuate that tacksmen should be removed altogether from the country, for such a class of educated and intelligent gentlemen is in a manner necessary to act as justices of the peace, as well as to conduct also the business in connection with the parochial and school boards. But some of these farms are so very large and extensive that they can very well afford to be divided, and at the same time leave a tacksman plenty to live on in a comfortable manner. Moreover, there are one or two tacks which may be done away with altogether.

ALEXANDER CAMPBELL.

Appendix XXIX

2010-08-02T17:33:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT of Rev. ALEXANDER MACKINTOSH, C.C., Dalibrog,

DALIBROG, SOUTH UIST,
September 28, 1883.

I have held a charge in this district of South Uist for the last three years, and in the fulfilment of my duties have had every opportunity of becoming intimately acquainted with the circumstances of each individual in the district. I consider the smallness of the present holdings the chief cause of the existing state of matters as regards the crofters of South Uist. Owing to the removal of small tenants to make room for large farms or tacks, townships became overcrowded, and the extent of land originally estimated to support one family was made to be depended on by two or more families ; and this system of subdivision then introduced has been acted up to for a number of years. How those removals referred to were brought about is already sufficiently well known to your Commission. Of the crofters removed, many were, against their wishes, known and expressed, forcibly put on board emigrant vessels and transported to North America. Others, again, were given portions of the lands held by tenants in townships already sufficiently crowded ; and thus, by the carrying out of a cruel and shortsighted policy, both the families thus located and those amongst whom they were located were, in the course of a few years, reduced, from a state of comparative comfort to one of privation and distress. Portions of lands held in common by the tenants of townships for grazing or cropping purposes were, at the time of the said clearances, and have been in subsequent years, let to tenants removed from their holdings to make'room for large farms, and to others, while the rent paid by the original tenants remained the same, and remains so to this day. As instances of this I may mention the two townships of Dalibrog and Kilpheder, which have by such means been left practically without any common lands, while no reduction of rent has been made in consideration of the serious curtailing of their lands. The lands of North Lochboisdale, of which the two townships referred to were deprived, were first given to crofters removed from Frobost and elsewhere, and in a few years the rent of each tenant in North Lochboisdale was arbitrarily raised, and is now, and has been for a considerable number of years, excessive. Thus for the lands of North Lochboisdale two rents have for years been paid —one by the present and actual tenants, another by the tenants of Dalibrog and Kilpheder, who have for years been deprived of those lands. Within the last few years portions of land held in common by the crofters of Dalibrog, Kilpheder, Boisdale, and South Boisdale respectively, and by them reclaimed from moss and bog, were put under crop by order and for the benefit of the proprietor, and subseqently let to the highest bidder, while no abatement of rent or other compensation was made to those so deprived of land.

Even as late as the spring of this year, portions of crofts in the township of North Lochboisdale were, without legal warning or the consent of the tenants asked or obtained, put under crop and fenced by the proprietor's servants on behalf of their master. This practice of curtailing and placing tenants on lands without the consent of the tenants paying rent for such lands, or any compensation made, has been carried to a considerable extent in this district, and from its introduction, many years ago, dates the beginning of hardship for the tenants of South Uist

Our crofters do not so much complain that their rents have been arbitrarily raised—although of this, too, there are not a few instances—as that crofts and common grazings have been very considerably reduced in extent, and additional tenants placed upon them, while the old rents are still being paid, and rent also paid by the new tenants. I am decidedly of opinion, however, that the rent paid for much of the land held by the crofters is excessive, and that some of the land, if held in small portions, would be dear at any rent. It must also be remembered that' kelp-rents' are in many, if not in most cases, being paid, while no kelp is now being made. The ' kelp rent' was higher than the 'ready-money' rent; and, on the abandonment of kelp making, a reduction should have been made to those paying rent by kelp—a reduction promised by the late Colonel Gordon, as is well known to everyone in Uist.

The want of leases for crofts I regard as a very serious drawback to the small tenants. Not, indeed, that of late wholesale evictions have taken place ; but it is beyond question that threats of eviction have been made use of to exact services which could hardly have been exacted from tenants holding leases. Of such services exacted is labour under pain of eviction, and at unremunerative wages, in cultivating lands, and planting and lifting potatoes for the proprietor.

I may also mention that threats of eviction have been made use of to compel tenants to renounce their rights to certain portions of their holdings, for which no compensation or abatement of rent was made, and also to compel the owners of dogs to have them shot by the proprietor's servants, while such dogs were necessary to their owners for the protection of their crops from sheep and cattle.

A practice exists, or lately did exist here, of charging any arrears of rent standing against an out-going tenant against the incoming one—and of this several instances have occurred within my own knowledge. Another practice, equally unjust, is that of withholding from tenants, clear of all debt to the proprietor, wages earned in working on the estate, even although such tenants be in extremely poor circumstances, or in want of food. This has been done in many instances by the local factor, acting under the instructions of his superior.

To remedy the existing state of matters among our South Uist crofters I consider it necessary—

1. To enlarge the present holdings of the crofters, and to give to each tenant land for grazing and cropping according to his ability and requirements. Small holdings I consider unable to support a family, and consequently dear at any rent or at no rent at alL A range of bill pasture for sheep and cattle I consider absolutely necessary to the crofters, such pasture land to be held by the crofters of each township in common, and under competent management. I am of opinion that there is in Uist land available for and sufficient to meet the requirements of the crofters—lands formerly tenanted by crofters, and now farmed by tacksmen or by the proprietor—farms which need not necessarily exist, and which cannot exist in their present number and extent if the requirements of the crofters get proper consideration.

2. By valuation to fix fair rents, due consideration being given to the inferiority of the soil of the Outer Hebrides as compared with that of other countries.

3. By fixity of tenure or otherwise, to give to each tenant more than a mere rent-payer's interest in and right to the soil

4. To encourage small tenants to improve their holdings by draining, fencing, and trenching, and to grant compensation for all such improvements made.

5. To give to those among the crofters who are more adapted for fishing than agriculture, holdings in place9 suitable and convenient for sea-fishing, with lands sufficient to graze two cows and some sheep, and to raise a supply of corn and potatoes. Lochs Eynort and Skipport, on the east side of this island, I consider most suitable for fishing, being safe harbours, and not far from good fishing grounds. Under this head I would direct special attention to the island of Eriskay, with a population of close upon 500 souls mainly devoted to fishing. The land under tillage in Eriskay has become weak and almost useless from yearly cropping, while the supply of peat for fuel must come to an end within the next few years.

The population of South Uist must be looked upon as made up of two classes those devoted to agriculture, and mainly depending upon land for their livelihood, and those again who may be termed ' crofter-fishermen.' While, therefore, the interests of the crofters proper are to be considered, it will, moreover, be necessary to devise means for the development of the fishing industry by providing boats, nets, &c, and bringing, by improved and frequent communication with the mainland, the fishermen of this district within a comparatively easy distance of markets, in which they can get ready sale for all kinds of fish, and at remunerative prices. The want of speedy and direct communication with the southern markets I look upon as having conduced not a little to the present miserable condition of our fishing and crofting population, who found themselves compelled by the force of circumstances to buy dear and sell cheap, and, by a continuance of this, to become heavily indebted to the local merchants who were, in times of scarcity and distress, supplying them with the necessaries of life.

Any scheme having for its object wholesale emigration from these islands, whether such scheme be proposed by Parliament or by the landed proprietors, I would look upon as inimical to the interests of our nation, and contrary to the wishes and feelings of our crofter population To emigration on the part of individuals who may, of their own free wiU, choose to emigrate, I do not object; but I am far from having any sympathy with the views of those who, of themselves or through their responsible and paid servants, have mainly if not entirely brought about the present condition of affairs in the Highlands, and who now point out to us wholesale emigration as the only possible remedy.

What our crofters wish is, land of sufficient quantity at a fair rent, and with fixity of tenure, and this in their native country. I am decidedly of opinion that there is in Uist sufficient land for more than the present population, and that emigration is not the only remedy for the existing state of matters, if it can be regarded as a remedy at all in consequence of evidence given by me before your Commission at Lochboisdale as to the manner in which the religious feelings of the majority of the population of South Uist have been persistently and systematically disregarded in the selection of teachers for our board schools, I have been regarded by some endeavouring to stir up feelings of religious animosity among our people.

This charge I emphatically deny. My distinct aim was to direct attention to clamant injustice which is without a parallel in any other parish in Scotland, and to discharge a duty which I owe to myself, to my position, and to numerous flock intrusted to m y care. Our views as Catholics regarding the necessity of denominational education are well known ; and we are surely to be excused if, while we have recognised spiritual guides of our own, we decline to take our views regarding such education from estate officials or others with no stronger claims to our religious guidance.

ALEXANDER MACKINTOSH, C.C.

Appendix XXVIII

2010-08-02T17:32:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by Rev. RODERICK MACDONALD, Minister of South Uist.

DRIMSDALE, SOUTH UIST, 6th October 1883

The Royal Commission not having been in session for the last few weeks, I delayed writing until now, although I had a desire to add to what I said before the Commission in May last, and this in consequence of statements made by others at the same time ; which statements I think call for remark, and, in connection with a pamphlet (to be noticed further on) lately published, reflecting on the conduct of the South Uist School Board, require some correction. I was therefore glad to receive your printed circular, of date 17th July last, informing me ' that the Commission would be glad to receive any written statement which I might be disposed to offer.' At the same meeting at which I was examined by the Commission at Lochboisdale, the Rev. Mr Mackintosh, C.C., Daliburgh, was also subjected to examination, and in the course of his answers he stated that, as the Catholics of the parish formed such a large majority of the population, the School Board as presently constituted did not properly represent the inhabitants of the parish ; that consequently the Protestant element should be eliminated out of the Board, or at all events placed in such a minority as to give the Catholic members the whole control of the Board's business, so that the Catholic religion should be taught in all the schools, adding that if the Protestant members were men of honour they ought to resign, and make room for Catholic successors. I cannot profess to remember the ipsissima used by Mr Mackintosh, but I am satished that I do not misrepresent him, at all events I have no wish to do so, and if I have unintentionally misstated his views I shall be glad that he should correct me.

The question of the representative character of our School Board I shall deal with before I finish this paper; meantime I shall say a few words regarding the connection of Protestantism with the educational interests ol South Uist previous to the passing of the Education Act of 1872, and in limine. I beg leave to state boldly, and that without fear of contradiction, that all the interest taken in the instruction of the young in the parish of South Uist up to 1872 was taken by Protestants

In this connection let me add that I am unwilling to make any statements that seem to betray controversial motives. I repudiate the idea. It is distasteful to me, and I have never indulged in it, but, as I must speak, I am bound to speak the truth, for the circumstances of the case require it. First and foremost, then, in speaking of educational matters, the old parochial schools naturally have a claim to take precedence. I do not, however, require to say much about them. They do not need to be lauded by me or anyone else. They are now a thing of the past, but they can never be forgotten.

It was a grand idea that was at the basis of their institution. They left their mark on the Scottish nation, and if they did not make Scotland, as some allege, the best educated country in the world, Scotland unquestionably owes them an unspeakable debt of gratitude. But Scotland outgrew the capabilities of her parish schools, and they had to be supplemented, and supplemented they were, and that nobly, especially in the Highlands, upwards of half a century ago. Some Highland ministers, conspicuously among them the Rev. Dr Norman Macleod, the Highlanders' friend, drew the attention of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland to the destitution that existed in the Highlands. Whereupon the Assembly sent Dr Macleod and Principal Baird as a deputation to the Highlands of Scotland, visiting among other places the parish of South Uist, but before doing so, calling upon the Catholic Bishop of Lismore, who gave them letters of introduction to the priests in the Highlands. Everybody hailed with delight the noble project. The report of the deputation resulted in the formation of the General Assembly's Education Scheme, and I speak from personal knowledge when I state that they sent some of their very best teachers to the parish of South Uist, men of education and scholarship, well qualified to discharge the onerous duties of their important office, and there are living still in this parish men who speak with affection, gratitude, and respect of those teachers who were instrumental in bestowing upon them the blessings of education.

When, in addition to this, I mention the Society for the Propagation of Christian Knowledge in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, with its numerous schools, planted in sequestered and outlandish places such as South Uist, not only for the purpose of giving an elementary English education, but also for teaching the natives a knowledge of useful and industrial work, it will be admitted that the Church of Scotland has nobly done her work in the education of the country.

It was all needed and more, and Lady Cathcart, recognising her duties to the people, and finding that there was a good held for a school in Benbecula, erected a splendid seminary there, and supplied a teaching staff, costing, including incidental expenses, a sum of £200 a year. This school gives not only elementary, but also secondary education, with industrial work, including sewing, knitting, washing, and dressing, on an extensive scale. Her Ladyship has done much, very much, for her people since she acquired possession of her Long Island properties, but, should she have done nothing more than the bestowal of this single blessing of the means of education for the young, she deserves their earnest gratitude.

All these schools were undenominational and unsectarian in the best sense of those terms, inasmuch as they were open to all, and no child's creed interfered with. There may have been a rare case of interference on the part of an over-zealous teacher, but the constitution of the schools did not sanction it, and the authorities having their superintendence scrupulously discouraged it.

Due credit ought also to be given to the Free Church, which, shortly after her formation, instituted an education scheme of her own, and certainly she was not neglectful of South Uist She had excellent schools doing good work in this parish, and, npon a review of the whole subject, I humbly think that we were less in need of the provisions of the Education Act than many places.

All this time, it may be asked what was done for the educational interests of South Uist by its Catholic population ? The answer is—literally nothing. The Protestants educated the Catholic children, many of them for nothing, and I believe I am right in saying that more than one respectable priest in the Highlands will acknowledge that they received the elements of their education in our Protestant schools. And do I blame the people of South Uist for this ? By no means. They had their own chapels to build, they had their priests to pay, and they were poor. In these circumstances, then, seeing that the Roman Catholics of South Uist never spent a single farthing (as far as I know) in the education of the youth of the parish, I think, to say the least of it, the proposal of M r Mackintosh seems very cool, viz., to use the money of the Protestants (for the Catholics pay only a small fraction, about one-fifth of the rates) to teach the tenets of the Church of Rome, and make use of an Act of Parliament, the spirit and letter of which I venture to say are entirely against any such purpose. In speaking of the Roman Catholic population of South Uist I have to say that, having lived among them for upwards of a quarter of a century, I found them most obliging, civil, and respectful; they were contented, happy, and loyal, and I have no doubt would continue to be so were outsiders to let them alone; nay more, I shall add, that having had many dealings with them, that having some of them in my service every year since I came to live among them, I have the most unbounded confidence in their truthfulness and honesty. In fact, there are many illiterate Roman Catholics, men and women, in South Uist to whom I would trust uncounted gold. Whether this is owing to racial heredity and transmitted qualities, or to clerical teaching, I shall not take it upon me to decide.

The pamphlet alluded to at the beginning of this paper bears the name of the Right Rev. Angus Macdonald, resident Catholic Bishop at Oban. It consists of a number of letters which passed between the Bishop and some office-bearers connected with Lady Cathcart's Long Island properties. I believe, however, it does not contain the whole correspondence. I have it not beside me, but I read it cursorily some time ago, and the purport of it seems to be to show that in the administration of the Education Act there were no concessions made to the Roman Catholic population—in fact, that they did not receive from the School Board the consideration which, from their numerical majority, they were entitled to.

I do not think this is correct Shortly after the passing of the Act there was a meeting of what may be called the local authority, when (the bulk of the people seemed to take no interest in the matter) we set about the election of a Board. I myself having had some experience in teaching, and as member of presbytery having had the superintendence of a number of schools, and as the minister of the parish, and as such supposed to be interested in anything that concerned the welfare of the parishioners, was expected to take part in the proceedings—so I offered my services, but on condition that two priests and the Free Church minister should be on the Board. Acting on this suggestion, the above parties, along with the requisite number of others supposed to be the most suitable, were duly nominated and subsequently elected, and became the first School Board of South Uist.

Since writing the above, I am reminded that there being more candidates nominated than the number of members to which the parish was entitled, a Protestant candidate, who afterwards became a very efficient member of the School Board, retired, so as to make room for one of the priests, and to avoid the expense of a poll.

A slight difficulty occurred at the very first meeting of the Board as to the question whether our meetings should be opened by prayer. This would have been agreeable to the majority of the Board, but, seeing that it might offend the Catholic members, it was ruled that each member should put up a mental prayer for himself, and that there should be no public audible prayer. By this concession some of us incurred a certain amount of unpopularity. However, we thought we did right.

The next difficulty was touching the teaching of religion, and we did minute that religion should be taught according to what is called use and wont, but this was not acted upon, and we thought it better that religion should be relegated to Sabbath Schools or any other means that the clergy might select, and that, according to the spirit of the Act, the energy of our teachers should be solely directed to the communication of a thorough sound secular education.

In the selection of teachers we never asked what was the creed or denomination of any candidate. We were entirely guided by the certificates of character and qualifications which they produced. In point of fact, we appointed two Catholic teachers, but none of them came forward. In the case of one of them we kept the school vacant for some time, and were obliged to appoint another, the Catholic candidate appointed failing to appear. We employ Catholics as compulsory officers. We have given gratuities to Catholic children to enable them to prosecute their studies with the view of their becoming teachers.

At first, in advertising for teachers, we made a knowledge of Gaelic a necessary qualification, but afterwards we abandoned this in order to widen the area of selection, and also to give Catholic candidates a chance, Gaelic-speaking teachers being, as we understood, scarce with them. So that I do not think we are righteously accused of denying to Catholics the consideration to which they are entitled. In fact, we considered ourselves as representing the whole and not any section of the population. Moreover, we have spent a great deal of time and trouble in getting school buildings erected, carrying on the extensive correspondence necessary for obtaining building grants, appointing teachers, and superintending the whole educational machinery ; and I venture to say that our efforts have been crowned with considerable success. We have a full and an excellent staff of teachers at present. All our teaching grants for the last year have not yet come in, but one grant is announced amounting to £123, 15s. In short, we have borne the heat and burden of the day, and if we are spared to see the end of the present triennial period, I have every confidence that we shall be able to show that our labour has not been in vain.

On the subject of the crofters' grievances I do not intend to enter—grievances they have, as who has not ? —but I do not think they succeeded in stating their case properly. The question is not what happened thirty, forty, or a hundred years ago. The problem to be solved is what to make of the crofter now. This problem I do not attempt to solve. But, however loath one may be to admit it, I fear that a sentiment uttered by a man in high quarters, and who ought to know, viz., 'That the crofting system is doomed,'is a sentiment, however unwelcome to many, is nevertheless true.

To offer any advice is needless and ungracious, especially when the party to whom the advice is given is predisposed to treat it with indifference, if not with contempt In regard to emigration, which appears to many to be the only- cure for the overcrowding which admittedly exists among Highland crofters, every man must be left to the freedom of his own will. I have already stated publicly, and have before and since given utterance to the same sentiments in their own hearing, that with all my love and affection and respect for my fellow-countrymen, the peasantry of the Highlands, who, however, I fear, are getting spoilt, I would much rather hear of their being comfortable and happy elsewhere than to see them struggling with adverse circumstances in their own country, constantly fighting with poverty, and often on the brink of starvation.

ROD. MACDONALD.

Appendix XXVII

2010-08-02T17:31:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by the Right Rev. ANGUS MACDONALD, D.D., Roman Catholic Bishop of Argyll and the Isles, as to certain Grievances of the Catholics in South Uist and Barra.

OBAN, 19th May 1883.

The appointment of a Royal Commission to examine into the condition of the crofters in the West Highlands, affords a favourable opportunity of bringing under notice, and, I trust, obtaining redress for, certain grievances under which one portion of them have been for many years back suffering. The matters to which I refer have been the subject of much negotiation and correspondence, which, to my regret, have led to little benefit. I have been deterred from bringing them under public notice, partly from extreme reluctance to introduce the name of the proprietrix, who I believe has never really understood the true nature of the case; and also in great part from a fear, which I believe to be well grounded, that those whom I meant to benefit might be made to suffer in other ways from any exposure I might make of their wrongs.

I refer to the way in which the Catholics (the great bulk of the population) of South Uist and Barra have been dealt with in educational matters, in being refused Catholic teachers in schools attended almost exclusively by Catholic children. It is not my wish, and it is not necessary to discuss the question of the propriety of combining or dissociating secular and religious instruction. As the law has been laid down by the Education Act of 1872, the decision of that, in each specific case, rests with the ratepayers, through the members they may appoint to represent their wishes. What I wish to explain is that the wishes of the ratepayers have been systematically ignored, and all educational questions settled for them by the factor, and a very small non- Catholic minority. Besides this specific grievance, I believe that a statement of this case will tend to show the existence of a widespread evil, in the dependant and degrading position in which such tenants are apt to be placed—with no security of tenure, no guarantee against removal at will, and with the fear constantly hanging over them, that if they venture to assert their rights they may be made to suffer for it, without having power to obtain redress. Nothing could be conceived more certain than this position to foster a low and cringing disposition, or more opposed to the formation of a manly, independent, enterprising spirit. For more reasons, therefore, than one, this seems a most suitable subject for investigation; and I feel that I am called upon, by the very responsible position which I hold, to state all that I know personally, or through others, regarding this particular grievance. I do not wish to enter any complaints against the estate-administration properly so called. The abuses to which I desire to call attention lie strictly outside that sphere, and it is only by going outside its proper department that the estate-administration has interfered in this matter at all. My present official connection with this part of the West Highlands began in May, 1878. I was much surprised to find, amongst other tilings, that the whole management of educational matters was practically in the hands of a very small non-Catholic minority, who in no ways represented the feelings or wishes of the immense majority of the people. The method in which School Board members were appointed seemed to be that this minority held a meeting, and settled the whole matter for themselves. They were in the habit of leaving one or two seats to the Catholic clergy, taking care, however, to reserve to themselves the great majority of the seats, so that, with a certain show of liberality, they retained the whole administrative power in their own hands. Further, they seemed never to have thought it worth while to consider the wishes of the people in the selection of teachers —such a thing as a Catholic teacher in these almost entirely Catholic islands being at that time utterly unknown. On the other hand, the people earnestly desired to have teachers who would be qualified to give their children sound religious as well as secular instruction; but they were helpless to obtain this. They had the law on their side, but it was practically a dead letter. They dared not enforce it. In other Catholic districts on the mainland, Catholics had their feelings invariably respected by boards composed mainly of non-Catholic members. Here, where they could have by their votes secured a majority of seats and then looked after their own interests, they were deterred by fear from exercising that right. I was determined to obtain redress for the people, if possible, as by my position I was bound to do; and for this two courses only appeared open.

If the School Boards, constituted as they then were, would consent to acknowledge and defer to the wishes of the majority, no one would have wished to dethrone them from the position which they had assumed. But if they refused to act in this equitable manner, then the only course left was to obtain security for the people, in the exercise of their lawful rights as electors to appoint a board which would fairly represent and execute their wishes. The early approach of the next election, in the spring of 1879, left no time to do much for the present. That election, or rather appointment, was therefore allowed to go on as in former cases. I resolved to approach the proprietrix, Lady Cathcart, then Mrs Gordon, to explain the case to her, and obtain her protection for her tenants; and to be guided as to future elections by the way in which that board (of 1879) should have meanwhile discharged its duties.

Accordingly, in August (13), 1879, I wrote to the proprietrix, explaining the wishes of the people, and the advantages which the law provided for them in the matter of secular instruction, and the opportunities which it allowed for enjoying religious instruction as well I expressed the hope that the boards, as already constituted, would be liberal enough to grant us Catholic teachers in future; but, in the event of their refusing, I asked her, not to interfere personally, but to give an expression of her wishes that her tenants should be free to exercise to the full their educational rights, and I asked this expressly that they might be free from all fear of molestation from others in the event of their having to use those rights.

Not receiving an answer to this letter, I wrote again (30th October 1879), and endeavoured still more fully and clearly to express our wishes. To quote one portion of this letter:—

It is not our wish to ask of you any course of action which would involve interference on your part in the working of the schools, still less to bring you in any way into collision with the local School Boards. Perhaps our views may be most clearly expressed as follows (speaking of South Uist and Barra):—

1. As the Catholics form the great bulk of the population of these islands, and their children form the immense majority in attendance at the board schools, they think it only fair that they should have teachers of their own denomination.

2. They have full power, by the Education Act. to take the matter into their own hands, and to secure Catholic teachers for all the board schools in these islands. For, having a majority of voters, they can return a majority of Catholic members at every School Board election, and so they can retain the entire control of education in their own hands. They would prefer, however, not to push their right unnecessarily.

3. But in the first place they would like clearly to understand their position, and to know that you wish them to have the free and unfettered enjoyment of the educational advantages which the law of the land gives them. Or rather (for they do not doubt this), they would like to have from you the expression of such a wish, which would prevent others from misrepresenting your views, and from unlawfully using your name to enforce submission to a different state of things.

I received a reply to my two letters, dated 21st November 1879. In it Mrs Gordon expressed her wish to deal liberally with all denominations, and whilst expressing a repugnance to interfere with board schools [which expressly she was not asked to do] she stated that she had no personal objection to what was proposed. This appeared to be intended as acquiescing in what I had asked, and I resolved to act upon it as such. Subsequent events have sadly undeceived me.

For the next three years I kept myself informed as to the action of the School Board in Uist especially, for in Barra the present board schools were not as yet built. Whenever a new school was opened in South Uist, or a vacancy occurred in those which had been in operation, the request of the Catholics for Catholic teachers was laid before the board. The practical result was that the claim was usually ignored. If, in some cases, it was agreed to get a Catholic teacher, the simple method of leaving the negotiations to the Catholic members was not permitted, and media of advertisement were employed which practically neutralised the board's consent. It is hardly surprising that, when matters were administered in such a spirit, an unfavourable construction suggested itself in explanation of several unpleasant matters which occurred. For example, during the time that there was question of appointing teachers for certain board schools in Uist, on two occasions the notice of meeting sent to the Rev. Donald Mackintosh, Benbecula, the only active Catholic member, was misdated by one day, bringing him to the appointed place just too late to take part in the proceedings. Again, an application presented by a Catholic male teacher was never produced at the meeting. Although known to have been sent, it must in some extraordinary way have miscarried, for the clerk declared that he had never received it.

Towards the end of 1881 the new board schools in Barra were approaching completion, and it became necessary to look out for teachers. As will be seen from the documents appended, the proportion of children at the various schools, from a denominational point of view, was this—in Castle Bay district, Catholics, 160; Protestants, 20; in North Bay district, Catholics, 95; Protestants, 5. No pains were spared to secure good Catholic teachers for those Schools; and as it was known that the proprietrix, now Lady Cathcart, was anxious to have a first-class male teacher in Castle Bay School, special pains were taken to secure this object, and with complete success. These Catholic candidates were proposed at the meeting of the School Board held to select teachers, and excellent testimonials were produced, but they were rejected and Protestant candidates chosen in their stead. From the appended documents (No. I.) it will be seen that the leading Catholics of Barra had addressed a memorial to the local factor, Mr Barron, who was chairman of the board, pointing out the reasonableness of the Catholic claim, and mentioning that thoroughly qualified Catholic teachers had sent in applications for both schools. In his reply (App. No. III.) Mr Barron favoured them with his personal views as to the qualification of teachers, and added that, as it was of the utmost importance to secure first-class teachers (which no one denied), and as instruction in religious subjects is compulsory, the question of creed is of secondary importance in selecting a duly-qualified teacher.

It is hardly necessary to add that (1) what Mr Barron ought to have considered was, not his own private views, which he was at full liberty to hold, but the views and wishes of the enormous majority of those whom he represented, which, as regarded the importance of religious instruction, were diametrically opposed to his own. (2) His reference might have been allowed some weight had it not been possible to procure a duly-qualified teacher who would meet the wishes of the people ; but this has never been expressly called in question, nor is it consistent with known facts. Meanwhile, the head factor, Mr Ranald Macdonald, had addressed a letter to the clerk of the Barra Board, Mr Allan Macdonald, in which he explained the steps he had taken to carry out Lady Cathcart's wishes with regard to Castle Bay; and in this letter I may call attention first to the care with which the wishes of the people were thoroughout ignored, as regarded the denomination of the teacher, although he might have perfectly well met her Lalyship's wishes and those of the people at the same time. There was no incompatibility between them, except on one of two suppositions—either that Lady Cathcart was opposed to the appointment of a Catholic teacher, whether duly-qualified or not; or that such a thing as a duly-qualified Catholic teacher could not be obtained. And, secondly, it is worth observing that whilst entering into certain arrangements as to North Bay School, there is not the slightest hint as to the propriety of appointing a Catholic teacher to that school (App. II.)

The head factor wrote again, 17th November (App. IV.), to the clerk of the Barra Board ; and on this letter it seems to me almost needless to comment, further than to point out, first, the startling misstatement and misapplication of the education law and perversion of logic which it exhibits ; and also the manner in which his position and Lady Cathcart's views are brought forward to influence the decision of the board. But, thirdly, I must point out also that the appeal to the majority of the board is also a mere sham, considering the way in which that board was appointed in total disregard of the wishes of the majority of people and even of ratepayers.

It is not surprising that, after this correspondence, the lay-Catholic members saw no alternative but to submit to the inevitable. The Catholic clergyman, however, the Rev. John Macdonald, felt bound to protest against such an over-riding of the lawful demands of those whom he represented, and he addressed another memorial on his own account to the local factor (App. VI.); and at the board meeting he protested against the decision arrived at in accordance with the factor's wishes. This brought down upon him a long letter from the head factor (App. VII.), on the greater part of which it is not necessary to comment, especially as that is done pretty fully in my reply (App. VIII.) It is, however, well to draw attention here to what occurs in the latter part of his letter, in reference to a teacher for North Bay.

It appears unsatisfactory that this enlightened view should have only dawned upon him at this stage of the negotiations, and it is not easy to understand on what grounds he is able to violate, in this case, the educational principles he has before so strongly advocated and enforced. Nor is it easy to see what
grounds he could give of a solid nature to justify the appointment of a Catholic teacher for North Bay School, which would not be equally applicable to the school at Castle Bay.

Several other letters passed between us on the subject, but with no result. As I was anxious to leave no means untried of ascertaining Lady Cathcart's real views. I then sent a full copy of all the correspondence to her Ladyship, or rather, us she was in a delicate state of health, to Sir Reginald Cathcart, and later on I endeavoured unsuccessfully to obtain an interview with him. Some little time after I received a letter from Lady Cathcart herself, which to my regret only proved that it was as hopeless to obtain a discussion of the case on its real merits with her as it was with her factor.

So matters ended for the time; and I have only to add that when, in the spring of 1882, the School Board election again came round, it became clear to me that it would be useless to attempt to force an election; not because the people were satisfied, but because they did not feel that freedom and security which would have allowed them to record their votes as they wished. As we could not, for that reason, rely upon the success which our numbers ought to have guaranteed, and as there was no wish to run the risk of uselessly increasing ill-feeling, matters were allowed to run on in their old course, until a better opportunity should present itself for having the question properly settled.

The appointment of a Royal Commission appeared to afford such an opportunity, and therefore I have taken the liberty to forward, for its consideration and examination, this statement, drawn up as fully and carefully as the very limited time at my disposal permitted.

+ ANGUS MACDONALD
Bishop Argyll and the Isles

1.—Copy Memorial by ARCHIBALD M'LELLAN, Vatersay, and OTHERS, to
JAMES BARRON, Esq., Chairman, Barra School Board.

* BARRA, November 1881.
[The 7th November, as appears from Mr Barron's reply.]
JAMES BARRON, Esq.

DEAR SIR,—Our object in writing to you regards the school teachers in Barra. As we suppose you will consult Mr Ronald M'Donald on the matter, we consider it proper to lay the following facts before you. The number of school children on the main island of Barra is 280 ; of these, 180 are in the Castle Bay district and 100 in North Bay district. In religion they stand thus:—In Castle Bay district, 160 Catholics and 20 Protestants —but five of the latter are nearly four miles from school; in the North Bay district there are 95 Catholics and five Protestants—two of tho latter being children of the Free Church catechist, who will not probably send them to board schools.

We , who know the people of Barra intimately, beg to assure you that there is great anxiety amongst them to have teachers of their own denomination to teach their children, and surely, taking numbers into consideration, we ask nothing out of the way in asking that this should be done. The parents of all the Catholic children are natives of Barra. The parents of all the Protestant children, without a single exception, are strangers, and some of them being servants have no hold upon the island, but just as long as they are kept as such. Excellent Catholic teachers can be got. Mr Stephen Lynn, who has sent in his application for the Castle Bay School, is a Catholic, and has the highest testimonials as to character and ability. For the North Bay School two applications have been sent in by Catholics, one Miss Ann Myron, the other Miss Teresa Duffy, both excellent teachers, especially the former. Of course, they all have been trained, and have high-class certificates. From Lady Gordon Cathcart's uniform kindness to the people of Barra, we have no doubt but she would wish to gratify their ardent desires in this matter.

We have only to add that the present teacher in Mingulay is a Protestant, and as he has been there for many years, it is our opinion that he should not be
disturbed.—Your obedient Servants,
ARCHIBALD MACLELLAN, Vatersay.
JOHN MACDONALD, C.C.
NEIL M'NEIL, Castle Bay.
TEDDY GLANCY, Castle Bay.

II.—An Extract from a Letter from R. McDonald, Secretary to Lady CATHCART, to Mr ALLAN McDonald, Clerk to the School Board of Barra, dated Cluny Castle, 7th November 1881.

I intimated to your board some time ago that Lady Cathcart was most desirous that the school at Castle Bay should be a first-class school, and offered on certain conditions to pay £20 of the teacher's salary.—I understood this proposal was favourably received by your board. Acting on this arrangement I have been carefully looking about for a really good teacher to be recommended by Lady Cathcart to your board.

I have been in correspondence with the Government Inspector of Schools, Mr Robertson, who kindly promised to assist in getting a good teacher for Castle Bay. I had letters from two teachers, recommended by the Government Inspector, and I am sorry to say that the one I selected to be recommended to your board has got a good school near Inverness, and has therefore withdrawn his application. I am still corresponding with the other, and as soon as I am satisfied we have the chance of getting a thoroughly good teacher who has proved himself to be successful I will write to you. The teacher with whom I was corresponding earned a grant during the last three year avering £1, 0s. 10d. for each scholar on average attendance. This was really the best proof we could get. We have now the near prospect of getting £2199, 3s. 2d. of a free building grant and a loan, on moderate terms, of £1098; and, if good grants are obtained for the scholars, I think it is possible the school rate in Barra may be lower than in any place in the Hebrides. A good salary will have to be allowed to the teacher of the Castle Bay School, so as to place within the reach of the children in Barra the means of acquiring a thorough course of instruction. The salaries of teachers are now much lower than they were a few years ago; but, in order to get a good teacher, I believe it will be necessary to offer £70—that is, £50 from the School Board and £20 from Lady Cathcart—together with the help of the Government grant. A good teacher, with regular attendance, should earn a very good grant for the Castle Bay Schook The services of a pupil teacher will likely be required. I enclose printed extracts showing the result of the teaching of
the candidates for Castle Bay School to whom I referred, which show what grants can be earned by a skilful and successful teacher.

Now, with regard to North Bay School, where I should be glad to assist your board, if they wish it, I have abstained from doing anything beyond this, viz.:—That I pointed out to the Ladies' Committee that their school at North Bay is now not required, and that the effect of keeping it open as a competing school is simply to diminish the attendance, and necessarily the Government grant in the Public School. In agreeing to close the North Bay School as a competing school, I have reason to believe that the Ladies' Committee, having sufficient funds—are willing to relieve the Barra School Board of the burden of maintaining the Mingulay School. There is no doubt whatever it is for the interest of the ratepayers that the School Board should gratefully accept the proposal of the Ladies' Committee, as by doing so, they would secure a good attendance, and a good Government grant at North Bay School, and they would be entirely relieved of all pecuniary responsibility regarding the Mingulay School. You should call a meeting of the School Board, and lay this proposal before them, and let me know the result. I may mention that it was a suggestion of mine, that, as the Ladies' Committee had ample funds, it would be better to close the North Bay School as a competing school, and let the Ladies' Committee take charge of the Mingulay School, and relieve your board of all pecuniary responsibility in connection with the teacher's salary and management of the school, beyond, that as a School Board, you were entitled to take such steps as you might deem expedient from time to time to satisfy yourselves, that the education given in the school was (in the sense of the Education Act) efficient. They would get the use of your school building, and during the time they occupied it they would have to take care of the building.

III.—Copy Letter JAMES BARRON, Esq., Chairman Barra School Board, to ARCHIBALD M'LELLAN, Esq., Vatersay, Barra.

RESIDENT HARBOUR ENGINEER'S OFFICE,
Buckie, 16th November 1881

ARCHIBALD M'LELLAN, Esq., Vatersay, Barra.

DEAR SIR,
—I was duly favoured with your memorial of 7th inst.
I beg to assure you that the matter referred to shall have my most careful consideration.
I trust you will excuse me when I state to you my opinion with reference to the appointment of teachers for Barra Schools.
It is of the utmost importance that the board should endeavour to obtain the services of first-class teachers, and as instruction in religious subjects is not compulsory, the question of creed is of secondary importance in selecting a duly qualilied person.

—I am, dear Sir, yours faithfully,
JAMES BARRON

IV.—Excerpt from Letter, R. M'DoNALD, Secretary to Lady CATHCART, to Mr ALLAN M'DoNALD, Clerk to the School Board of Barra, dated at Cluny Castle, l7th November 1881.

Since I wrote to you on the 7th inst. I received a letter from Mr J. C. Robertson (who is now temporarily discharging the official duties of the Chief Inspector of Schools for Aberdeenshire district), in which he repeats his strong recommendation of Mr Cameron, who has proved himself to be a most successful teacher, both in large schools such as the Greenock School, and medium-sized schools such as the one he now manages. I have taken considerable pains to get a good teacher for Castle Bay School, and I have the utmost confidence in asking your board to confirm the selection made by Her Majesty's Inspector of Schools. As the school is ready for occupation, the sooner it is opened the better, and the parish is now losing by every day's delay which takes place.

Although the acceptance of Lady Cathcart's offer was formerly intimated, and on the faith of this acceptance I took a good deal of trouble in the matter, yet if there is any change of views by the majority of the board, I have no wish to do anything farther; but if, on the other hand, they still desire to carry out the arrangement, which I understood had been practically concluded, I shall have much pleasure in bringing to a formal termination the engagement of Mr Donald Cameron, and I assure you I reckoned myself fortunate in getting hold of such an excellent teacher. If the board wish me to act in this matter, it will be proper that they should sign the enclosed letter or minute of authority, and on receiving, this I will at once do my best to carry out their wishes.

It is with reluctance that I allude to the steps taken by two respected members of your board—Rev. J. Macdonald and Mr Neil M'Neil, supported by Mr M'Lellan, Vatersay, and Mr T. Glancy, Castle Bay—in corresponding with the chairman of the board, praying that the teachers of the Barra Public Schools should be selected only from the Roman Catholic denomination.

If I had thought that the nominal connection with any denomination would be made a condition, I would have respectfully declined to take any part in the matter. No one can justly accuse me of being actuated by sectarianism in selecting tenants or servants on any of the estates with which I am connected. I have, however, met with good and bad among all denominations, and I consider the denomination to which a person belongs a most treacherous test. It is significant that I expressed these views to Her Majesty's Inspector of Schools when I first applied to him, and told him that it was my general practice not to inquire about the religious professions of candidates for farms or situations, lest I should insensibly be influenced thereby. In public matters, such as school appointments, I did expect that Mr Neil M'Neil would take the same view as I do myself, and I am surprised that he would exclude all, however otherwise well qualified, except those connected with his own denomination. He enjoys a practical monopoly of the trade of Barra, and I always understood that he acted on the policy, in public and secular matters, of making no distinction between one denomination and another, and therefore I was not prepared to see his name attached to the communication I received yesterday from Mr Barron. Unfortunately, sectarianism caused a good deal of bitter contention in the management of many schools, and the vital educational interests were neglected. To put an end to all these petty jealousies the Act carefully excluded the religious element from all public schools, and the teacher of a public school is now no more of a religious instructor than an excise officer or any other general public official, and should a teacher of any public school interfere with the religious belief of any child he exposes himself to be censured or otherwise dealt with by the board. On the mainland, the members of School Boards representing three times the number of denominations in Barra, work cordially together in promoting secular education in the public schools, and the most of the denominations attend to the religious teaching by Sabbath schools and other agencies, and surely this is a more enlightened course of action than to attempt to exclude all from the office of a teacher except one favoured denomination.

I have really no personal denominational interest in the Barra Schools, and my chief aim and object had been to promote efficient education in such a way as to be as light a burden on the ratepayers as practicable. The School Board, or a majority of them, on whom the Act lays the responsibility, of appointing the teachers, may draw back from the undertaking made with Lady Cathcart, but it will be a breach of faith if they do so. And if they intended to do so, it would have been more courteous if they had given me notice before I took steps for the election of a teacher for Castle Bay School.

V.—Excerpt from Letter, Mr RANALD McDonald, Secretary to Lady CATHCART,

to Mr ALLAN, Clerk to the School Board of Barra, dated Cluny Castle, 17th November 1881.

DEAR SIR,—Since writing you about the Barra Schools, I thought I might send you, for the information of your board, an article I have cut out of the Scotsman newspaper of Wednesday last. Being chairman of two School Boards on the mainland, I consider it my duty to watch the progress of other schools, and endeavour to keep our own schools, if possible, above the average of the country.

From the paper enclosed your board will see the average grants gained by the schools in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Greenock, and it is remarkable that Greenock is the highest. I was rather pleased to notice this, as Mr Cameron, the candidate for Castle Bay School, came a few years ago from one of the Greenock schools.

Instead of any internal squabble, I hope the practical good sense of your board will come into action, by selecting the best teacher, without reference to creeds or religious professions. If they do so, I have no doubt your schools will be a success.

VI.—Copy Letter, the Rev. JOHN MACDONALD, C.C., Barra, to JAMES BARRON, Esq., Chairman, Barra School Board.

BARRA, 5th December 1881.

JAMES BARRON, Esq.

DEAR SiR,—Mr A. M'Lellan, Vatersay, handed me your letter, dated 16th November, in answer to our memorial to you, showing why Roman Catholic teachers should be appointed to the schools in Barra. In answer, I beg to submit the following statements for your consideration, as I think you are not really aware of our feelings as Catholics on the subject:
—In your letter you make education almost everything, religion only secondary. In this we Catholics differ from you. We assign the first place to religion. W e look on education without religion as a shadow without the substance, as a body without a soul.

In this matter we are the parties concerned, and surely we have a right to think for ourselves so far as regards ourselves. We have no wish to intrude our opinions on others; why should others intrude their opinions on us in a matter of such consequence, and which regards not them but us. Granted that religion is not taught directly in the schools, still the good or bad conduct of the teacher will always influence the children for better or worse. If, in spite of the parents, you appoint Protestant teachers, there will be no sympathy, no kind, cordial feeling between the children and their teachers. Parents and children will have a feeling of suspicion against the teachers, a feeling of degradation, a feeling of oppression, a feeling of injustice done to them; and so long as this galling yoke is imposed on them, so long will there be bitter animosity between those on whom it is imposed and those who impose it. We surely have as much interest in having our children educated in the best possible manner as any others can have.

For this purpose we sought and obtained the services of very excellent teachers of our own denomination. Mr Stephen Lynn is recommended to us by the Principal of the Hammersmith Training College, London; Miss Ann Myron by the Principal of the Catholic Training College, Liverpool. Is there any reason why they should not be appointed? Who can give a truer test of A character of teachers than those who have trained them ? In your letter you say that the law will protect the Catholics from any interference to their religion on the part of Protestant teachers. Well, really, it is a pity that in a school containing 150 Catholics and only 20 Protestants, that in another school containing 95 Catholics and only 5 Protestants, teachers should be appointed from whom Catholic children must have recourse to the law to protect their consciences.

Sir, it will be cruel injustice. Perhaps you may say that Protestants have as much right to have their conscience protected as Catholics. Granted. They certainly have as much right. But have they more ? Have 5 more right than 95 ? Have 20 more right than 150 ? Had we contested the last two elections to the School Board we would not now be in the position we are. We would have had a majority at the board. But when a former factor asked me not to contest the election, as it would be hard if the proprietors were not represented at the board, I, for the sake of peace and harmony, yielded. Is it right or honourable in a successor to take advantage of our good nature and peaceable dispositions, to injure us so deeply ? We still wish for peace, if justice be done to us. Lady Gordon Cathcart may not be aware of how sore we feel on the subject, but if our reasonable request be refused, we shall lay the whole case before her, with full explanations, and from the brief knowledge we have of her, we believe she will cause justice to be rendered to us, and we ask for nothing more. In the meantime, I earnestly beg of you to postpone the election of teachers until her Ladyship is consulted on the matter.
—I am, Dear Sir, Your obedient Servant, '
JOHN MACDONALD, C.C.

VII. Copy Letter, RANALD MACDONALD, Esq., Cluny Castle, Aberdeen, to
the Rev. John MACDONALD, C.C., Craigstone, Barra.
CLUNY CASTLE, ABERDEEN,

10th January 1882.
Barra Schools

REV. DEAR Sir,—The Clerk of the Barra School Board sent me an extract minute of the meeting held on 7th December last, from which I regret to see your name appears as dissenting. All the other members of the board having agreed to implement the arrangement made by your School Board with Lady Cathcart, at the meeting held on the 24th February 1879, your dissent had no practical effect on the decision of the board, but in other respects it is not without significance, and shows a change of attitude towards Lady Cathcart; for I observe from the extract minute sent to me in 1879 that you were present at the February meeting of that year, and was a consenting party to the arrangement against which you have recently recorded your formal dissent.

In carrying out Lady Cathcart's part of the agreement made with your School Board, with the view of making the school at Castle Bay a 'Principal Public School' (as stated in your minute of February 1879), I applied to one of Her Majesty's Inspectors to recommend a thoroughly experienced and successful teacher, combined with respectability of character. In applying to the Government Inspector of Schools for assistance in the selection of a teacher, I was careful to explain that religious profession was not to affect the selection, and I mentioned that the usual rule was, in any selection connected with estate administration, not to inquire as to any candidate's connection with any sect or denomination, but to have regard to the personal qualifications for any special appointment to be filled up. You must be personally aware that this practice has been universally adopted in your own district. With the view of benefiting the people of Barra you know that Lady Cathcart recently offered to assist some of them to purchase boats. In doing so there was no attempt made to overlook your people. I really cannot say whether those to whom the offer was made were Protestants or Catholics ; and I should be extremely sorry if any sectarian action were taken to render it necessary, in future, to make any distinction in estate administration between the adherents of any religious sect or denomination. The recent changes made in Barra might almost seem to indicate that a preference was given to Roman Catholics. The last large grazing let (Vatersay) was given to a Roman Catholic, and the last large croft let was given to Mr Neil M'Neil, and in both cases the former tenants were Protestants. The selections were made irrespective of sects, and entirely owing to the personal qualifications of the new tenants. In every different way in which any effort was made to benefit the people in the parishes of Barra and South Uist they were always treated fairly and impartially, and no one was excluded on account of his religious profession or connection with any denomination of Christians. As stated already, I made it a rule not to inquire what sects they belonged to, but when employment was offered to people from the Western Isles at Buckie Harbour, the Rev. Mr Clapperton can tell you that a large proportion of them belonged to your denomination. The Rev. Mr Wilson, Fetternear, can tell you the same about the men from the Western Isles employed at Cluny, and I believe it happens that at present the whole of them (at Cluny) happen to be Roman Catholics. I have in my office here, a young man from Benbecula who is a Roman Catholic. Considering the care which has been taken to act justly and impartially to all, I frankly confess that the letter you wrote to the local factor on the estate of Barra, dated 5th December, manifests a strong feeling on your part which I am very sorry exists, for it shows how the efforts in the past are so very Rttle appreciated by you. The expressions you use, such as imposing a 'galling yoke', causing 'bitter animosity', 'feeling of degradation' a feeling of oppression' a feeling of injustice' &c. These strong expressions primarily referred to the school appointments, and specially to the fulfilment of the arrangement made with Lady Cathcart by the board in 1879. Your observations could not refer to the North Bay School appointment, as your letter is dated the 5th, and the meeting of the School Board took place on the 7th December. I hope, on full reconsideration of the past history of the estate administration, you will modify the very strong expressions in your letter to the factor quoted above, and that you will see the propriety of not unnecessarily introducing sectarian views (which may lead to 'bitter animosity' in connection with the public and social business. In the management of public schools, Parliament took special care to prevent, as far as possible, unseemly disputes about religious instruction in schools regulated by the Education Act of 1872. The Government Inspector takes no cognisance of religious instruction, and if given at all it is subject to a 'conscience clause' and the 68th section of the Education Act prescribes That no child shall in any such school be placed at any disadvantage with respect to the secular instruction given therein by reason of the denomination to which such child or his parents belong, or by reason of his being withdrawn from any instruction in religious subjects.

Now that our schools are publicly supported by those connected with different denominations, it would be better if each denomination made separate provision for the religious teaching of the children respectively belonging to each. Both religious instruction, as well as secular education, would be more satisfactorily promoted by doing so, than by going through the form of teaching religion in the public schools by the teachers, which often leads to unseemly squabbles. It is with some hesitation I offer any suggestion as to the duties of the School Board, as they have independent statutory powers. I know that Lady Cathcart takes a great interest in the social and educational improvement of her people in the Western Isles, and would feel disappointed if any ecclesiastical discord obstructed the social welfare of the people. I may also state that, personally, nothing connected with the management of the estates, either on the mainland or in the insular districts, would gratify me more than to see the gradual and decided improvement of the natives of South Uist and Barra, socially, industrially, and educationally. I hope that in these matters you will heartily sympathise with me, and that while reserving to yourself the fullest liberty to take steps for the religious instruction of your people, you will see the propriety of not unnecessarily intruding the teaching of sectarian views into the public region, when you come into contact with those who hold conscientiously different views. As stated already, it appears to me that the peaceful and tolerant course, in these circumstances, is to give every facility for the separate teaching of denominational religion, and leave the teacher of the public school to deal with the branches of education which are recognised by the Act as necessarily forming his duties, and also recognised by the Government Inspector. By adopting this course, the cordial co-operation of members of School Boards connected with different denominations might be secured, and it is exceedingly desirable that in such a place as Barra hearty co-operation among all the members should be secured, and in order to secure tins, mutual concession should be made. This leads me to remark that if I had been a member of your School Board I would have voted at your meeting of 7th December as Mr Neil M'Neil did, by (1) confirming the arrangement previously made with Lady Cathcart about Castle Bay School; and (2) by preferring Miss Teresa Duffy, or postponing the election, in the hope that an experienced Roman Catholic female teacher might be got who could speak Gaelic. Even though I hold the view that the public school is not the proper place for religious instruction, yet I have all along been of opinion that it was proper,—caeteris paribus— that one of the teachers should be connected with your denomination. Before your meeting in December, I spoke to one of the Government Inspectors to bring the North Bay appointment under the notice of any qualified teacher who was a Roman Catholic. I then heard of a Miss Macdonald, in the Arisaig district, but it was thought she would not go to Barra. There was another name also mentioned, but she did not come forward as a candidate. I had a conversation with Mr Barron after he returned from Barra. He then told me that he would have voted for Miss T. Duffy, if she had had a knowledge of Gaelic. He was aware that in elementary teaching in the Highlands and Islands, the Inspector of Schools attached considerable importance to this part of the qualifications of a teacher. I appreciate the courtesy shown to me by members of the Barra School Board, and I have no doubt they did what they at the time thought to be right when they appointed Miss Gibson, who is known to be a respectable young woman of good abilities; but I must admit I was disappointed when I heard of the decision of the board, and would have preferred if every means had been exhausted to secure the hearty concurrence of all members. I may state that I have taken means to induce Miss Gibson's father to withdraw the acceptance of the situation on behalf of his daughter, and he has practically agreed to do so, and thus an opportunity will be afforded to elect a Roman Catholic teacher to fill the situation at North Bay School. If you know a certificated and successful teacher suitable for the North Bay School, you may ask her to send in a formal application to the chairman of the board, and you will not overlook the importance the Government Inspector attaches to a knowledge of Gaelic, in teaching children who understand no other language.
—I remain, Dear Sir, Yours truly,

RANALD MACDONALD.
The Rev. John Macdonald. R.C.C.,
Craigston, Barra,
By Lochmaddy.

VIII.—Copy Letter,
Bishop MACDONALD, Oban, to RANALD MACDONALD, Esq.,
Cluny Castle, Aberdeen.

OBAN, Bishop's HousE, 27th January 1882.

DEAR SIR,—The Rev. John Macdonald, Barra, has informed me of the discussions which have taken place of late regarding the appointment of teachers to the two public schools recently erected in that island. I regretted very much to learn that there was danger of bad feeling being aroused on the subject. As the education question there, as in other Catholic districts, has for some years past been a matter of deep interest to me, I am induced to intrude upon your time by the conviction that great part of this unfortunate state of affairs is due to misconceptions; and also by the hope that, viewing the case from a distance, I may be able to offer explanations in a calmer and more conciliating tone than is easy for those to assume who are in the heat of the dispute. It is difficult, indeed, in stating arguments, to avoid the appearance of controversy; but it is my sincere wish to approach the subject in a friendly though perfectly candid and open manner. You may perhaps wonder on what grounds I interfere in the question at all. I trust that the sequel will make this clear.

I. The first thing which strikes me forcibly in your letter of the 10th inst. to the Rev. Mr Macdonald is the view with which it opens, viz., that those members of the board who persist in asking the appointment of Catholic teachers were placing themselves in opposition to Lady Cathcart's wishes, and solely responsible for the existing religious party spirit; and the further remark to which it leads, amounting to a distinct threat, that if they persist in that course it may be necessary in future to make (in social and estate relations) a distinction between members of different denominations. Now this calls imperatively for an explanation. Considering all that Lady C. has done, and is still disposed to do, for her tenants, without distinction of class or creed, any course by which a particular sections the view with which it opens, viz., that those members of the board who persist in asking the appointment of Catholic teachers were placing themselves in opposition to Lady Cathcart's wishes, and solely responsible for the existing religious party spirit; and the further remark to which it leads, amounting to a distinct threat, that if they persist in that course it may be necessary in future to make (in social and estate relations) a distinction between members of different denominations. Now this calls imperatively for an explanation. Considering all that Lady C. has done, and is still disposed to do, for her tenants, without distinction of class or creed, any course by which a particular section of those tenants should place themselves in opposition to her Ladyship in what concerned estate management or in any matter in which she claimed control over them would be most unjustifiable and most disastrous from every point of view. But I think it will not be difficult to show that in this case there is a great misunderstanding—a confusion, possibly, of ideas, which, when explained, will remove the difficulty, but which if allowed to subsist might lead to very lamentable results.

In what concerns estate management nothing could justify class opposition except a patently unjust treatment of that class. The supposition of any such injustice is here out of the question. I never heard a single person in South Uist or Barra speak of Lady Cathcart but in terms of deep respect and affection; and nothing less than this has been deserved by her.

But the education question is not one of estate management, nor is it one in which Lady Cathcart wishes to interfere in any way whatever. The first statement is clear from the Education Act of 1872; the second from her own assurance to myself.—
To take the matter in detail.

(1) The Education Act does not exclude religious teaching from public schools. It does not enforce it, but it permits it it under certain conditions. The aim of the Act was to enforce sound secular instruction throughout the land, whilst interfering as little as possible with the religious views and wishes of sections of the community. For this purpose it requires that every State-aided school (whether public or denominational) should, every time it meets, give two full hours of secular instruction from which all religious teaching is carefully and peremptorily excluded. But it leaves it to the managers of such schools to allow religious instruction to be imparted in them (to children only whose parents wish it) out of the hours of secular teaching. More than that, if even a small minority of a different denomination are not able in conscience to avail themselves of the religious instruction thus given—say in a public school—the Education Department, both in theory and in practice, allows that to be a sufficient reason for permitting that minority to open a school for itself, and for admitting such school to Government inspection and Government aid. It cannot be said in the face of this that the Education Act excludes religious instruction from public of State-aided schools.

(2) Further, the same Act leaves the appointment of the managers of public schools in any given school district to the ratepayers of that district. These have the full legal right to appoint such members for the school board as shall best represent their wishes, or at least the wishes of the majority. By the laws of the land, each School Board is, on a small scale, for its district, what Parliament is for the kingdom. The electors are the constituency; the members are their representatives. And the constituents have a full right to turn the members out of office if they fail to represent them faithfully. The conclusion from all this seems to me inevitable—that by the law the ratepayers have they full and sole right to determine through their representatives whether there shall be religious instruction given in their schools, and by whom it shall be given. Any course which deprives them of their freedom to exercise this right, and overrides their wishes on this subject, is an interference with a legal right, which is exercised jealously in every other part of Scotland. Everywhere else, where non-Catholic electors have been in a majority (I speak with considerable knowledge), they have spared no pains to keep their advantage. As far as I have ever heard, with one exception (and that the case of a Catholic district), the only instances in which a majority of ratepayers have waived their right, and allowed a minority numerically insignificant to have the lion's share of representation on the School Board have been those very Catholics of South Uist and Barra who are now accused of an illiberal and bigoted spirit. Elsewhere, where a board mainly composed of non-Catholics has had to deal with Catholic districts under its jurisdiction, it has invariably (and the cases have not been rare) admitted the right of these districts to have Catholic teachers, and has left it to the Catholic members to find the teacher—naturally enough, as they were most likely to be successful. In South Uist and Barra alone has a small but enlightened and liberal minority used the control which it only possessed from the unexampled forbearance of the poor Catholics to refuse persistently every request of the Catholics to have teachers (easily procurable) of their own denomination, in schools filled almost entirely with Catholic children, and to refuse to let Catholic members look out for such teachers. There, and there alone, we find them looking for teachers and advertising for them in those quarters and through these channels only through which there was least hope of lighting on a Catholic. Can it be wrong under such circumstances to judge the motives of these men rather by their conduct than by their professions ?
I believe that if the past history of these transactions were laid before the public, the difficulty would be to get the public to believe it possible in this nineteenth century. Of one thing I am sure, that had it been a small Catholic minority which had so dealt with an overwhelming non-Catholic majority, their action would not have been tolerated for a single day. The press would have teemed with denunciations of such an illiberal policy, and language would have been used besides which the strongest expressions used by the Rev. John Macdonald would have appeared tame.

II. Again, you seem to reproach the Rev. Mr Macdonald with now wishing to withdraw from an agreement entered into with Lady C. in February 1879.
But what was that agreement? Apparently that she would give £20 towards Castle Bay teacher, provided that school were made a ' principal public school,' or provided that a thoroughly efficient teacher were appointed. How does the demand for a Catholic teacher involve the breach of any such agreement ? Does a school cease to be a ' principal public school' by the appointment of a Catholic teacher to it ? Or is it implied that such an article as a thoroughly efficient Catholic teacher is not to be had in the market? Many of H.M. Inspectors of Schools could have told you that they are to be had. The Catholic male teacher whom I got to apply for Castle Bay school, and who appears to have been rejected, has now been appointed to a large Catholic school in Greenock, where, as official statistics will show, Catholic education is fully on a par with that of the public schools. But, then, to carry out Lady C.'s views, you consulted H.M. Inspector about a teacher, and were ' careful to explain that religious profession was not to affect the selection.' But the electors of Barra and their true representatives demanded, and had a legal right to demand, that religious profession should affect the selection. It certainly seems odd to a spectator that the self-constituted board should divest itself of its functions and delegate them to another party (however otherwise worthy); and that he should in turn be ' careful' to exercise the powers confided to him direct opposition to the wishes, all but unanimous, of those chiefly interested; that he should advance this as a proof of the thorough absence of prejudice, and should express some measure of indignation, because some decline to be grateful to him for so doing! Seeing what the rights and wishes of the people on this point are, surely it would have been no harm, it would have argued no want of liberality or of zeal for education, to have made the experiment of a Catholic teacher.

III. In one place you argue—
'Now that our schools are publicly supported ' by those connected with different denominations, it would be better if each denomination made separate provision for the religious education (of its respective children).' The thought occurs to me to wonder whether this view has been thought of, or acted on, in the South Uist Board Schools. But to pass that by, why should it be so ? If all cannot enjoy the benefit of religious instruction given daily in the school, but some must be debarred from it, why must all be on that account deprived of it ? —and especially when one denomination represents the overwhelming majority (in Eriskay, I believe, there is not a single non-Catholic scholar), why should this immense majority be deprived of such an advantage, because a mere handful of others cannot share it? How commonly we find religious (non-Catholic) instruction given in public schools throughout Scotland, though hundreds of Catholics and other Dissenters have to contribute to the support of these schools why have I entered into the subject at such length? Simply as the natural representative, in religion, of the Catholic population ; because I see that the question is being discussed under aspects which I believe to be mistaken ones; and because I am convinced that only a full and frank explanation on both sides, and a comparison of ideas, can effect a cordial and lasting understanding. We do not, and we cannot, look upon the question except as one involving religious as well as secular education; and the law fully sanctions this view. I have had considerable experience of religious instruction, and I can attest that without the school organisation and discipline, without the aid of trained teachers, the work of religious instruction and moral training must be very.difficultMacdonald seems to stand alone in his present attitude, it is not that others do not share his views, but that he, as pastor, is bound to disregard worldly influences which naturally weigh heavily on members of his flock.

To be honest, I must make a further remark, not with a view to vent illfeeling, but certainly as a reproach, which I think is merited. 'In the management of public schools, Parliament took special care to prevent as far as possible unseemly disputes about religious instruction.' Yes! but not by committing to the estate management department the right to control and override the wishes of majorities of ratepayers, and to enforce its views by threats of the proprietor's displeasure, and of possible social disabilities in case of disobedience. No ! it placed the whole matter in the hands of the people, and it undoubtedly expected that those who. by their position and education, would naturally be looked up to as models for imitation in their respective spheres would first set the example of respect for the law, and of a hearty desire to avoid all interference with any legitimate expression of religious feeling. Should animosity now prevail, the responsibility will certainly rest, not with the poor Catholics, who have till now shown an example totally unexampled, but with the few who have refused them a right which the laws of the land allow to them; and I am confident that such would be the award of public opinion, were the question submitted to its decision.

I am glad that there is talk of a Catholic teacher for North Bay. I can't imagine an argument for this that is not good for Castle Bay and South Uist in general: but a half loaf is better than no bread. Hoping you win be able to believe that all this is written in the sincere wish to promote peace and union,—I remain, Dear Sir, Yours truly,

+ ANGUS MACDONALD,
R.C. Bishop

R. Macdonald, Esq

Appendix XXVI.

2010-08-02T17:30:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by Rev. JAMES CHISHOLM, C.C., Craigston, Barra, by Lochmaddy.

CRAIGSTON, BARRA, October 1883.

The circular addressed to me by the Secretary of the Crofters' Commission invites me to express my views about the present state of the crofters residing upon this island.

As the grievances of the people have been set forth in their true light before the Royal Commissioners at Castle Bay, I will not enter into particular cases.

Without giving way to any partial spirit, I must say that the entire bulk of the population of this island, with a very few exceptions, are compelled to drag out a very poor existence. The cause of the prevailing poverty is easily arrived at: it is the want of land. The island is particularly hilly and rocky, yet there is enough of good land if it were divided amongst the people. But this does not seem, even to a superficial observer, to be the case. When we consider that the island is thickly populated, and when we advert to the fact that the best half of island is held by large farmers, we must admit that the cry for more land is very reasonable.

At present the crofters are settled on very poor patches of land, which, from frequent cultivation, have a struggle to yield a few potatoes, or a thin crop of barley, and by no means do they return sufficient crops to compensate the labour expended upon them. As long then as the crofts are so small, and the townships so crowded, it will be impossible for the people to emerge out of their present poverty. On this island no fisherman can live from the produce of the sea alone, owing to the tempestuous nature of the coast, and the want of a ready transit to the markets. Those, then, who follow the profession of fishermen should have as much land as would keep two cows, and those who live by the land should have their present holdings greatly enlarged, and rented according to the value of the soil.

In order to remedy the sad state of matters, I would suggest that the large farms should be broken up and converted into smaller farms, with rents axed by disinterested parties, and given to those who are willing and able to pay just rents.

I would also suggest that the crofters should get leases, for those who are tenants-at-will, and are subject to be turned out at any period, have, generally speaking, very little interest in the soil,—that is to say, they would not enter into any expensive improvements, not knowing who might possibly reap the benefit of their labour. Compensation should also be given for improvements. The people in their modes of living and dress are very frugal, and morally good.

We sincerely hope that some scheme will be devised to better our present condition, but such a one as would have for its object the removal of the people to some foreign country would be entirely opposed to the wishes of the people, and instead of being considered a benefit, would be looked upon as dangerous to their interests.

JAMES CHISHOLM.

Appendix XXV

2010-08-02T17:26:00.000+01:00

STATEMENT by the Rev. ARCHIBALD MACDONALD, A, & S. Minister of Barra.
MANSE OF BARRA, 13th August 1883.

WERE the population, especially the crofters, cottars, and labouring class, more economical and industrious, no improvident marriages, no subdivision of crofts, the community would be more prosperous and comfortable. Large farms, combined with the potato failure, have contributed to a congestion of the population. Crofters require more land for produce, stock, and employment than they have, and should have 'bent' with which the estate abounds, for thatching their houses at a moderate charge—provender being insufficient for stock—although notwithstanding they use it for thatch. The educational means and opportunities are sufEcient for obtaining a liberal education.

The proprietrix, Lady Gordon Cathcart, shows a conspicuous and thorough interest in the population, in giving the poor necessary comforts—in apportioning large tracts of arable and pasture land to the crofters and cottars—in assisting people to emigrate, and in helping fishermen pecuniarily to prosecute their avocation, and has also enhanced the value of the estate by building a hotel and cottages, erecting a pier, and laying down plantations. Were the fishermen located around the bays on the mainland of the parish near to churches and schools, &c, provided with suitable boats, and each equipped with fishing materials, there would be more individual wealth and prosperity on the estate; however, much depends on the intelligence and industry of the people themselves for future prosperity.

ARCHD. MACDONALD.

Tarbert, Harris, 13 June 1883

2010-07-25T00:02:00.004+01:00

TARBERT, HARRIS, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 1883.

Present:—
Sir KENNETH S. MACKENZIE, Bart., Chairman.
DONALD CAMERON, Esq. of Lochiel, M.P.
C. FRASER-MACKINTOSH, Esq., M.P.
Sheriff NICOLSON, LL.D.
Professor MACKINNON, M.A.

Witnesses
Norman Mcdonald, crofter, Scarp
John Mcleod, cottar, Ardhassaig
John Mcdiarmid, former crofter, Scalpa
Murdo Morrison, crofter, Caolas-Scalpa
Rev Roderick Mackenzie, Free Church minister, Tarbert
Kenneth Macdonald, factor, North Harris
Angus Campbell, crofter, Plocropool
John Mcleod, cottar, Tarbert
Angus Ferguson, Taransay
Ronald Macdonald, Taransay
Donald Macdonald, crofter, Grosaway
Lachlan Campbell, crofter, Scadabay

Tarbert, Harris, 13 June 1883 - Lachlan Campbell

2010-07-24T23:52:00.000+01:00

LACHLAN CAMPBELL, Crofter, Scadabay (43)—examined.

18129. The Chairman.
—How many families are there at Scadabay?
—Eighteen.

18130. How many paying rent?
—Six are in the rent-roll.

18131. Are you sent here on behalf of the whole eighteen ?
—Yes.

18132. What have you got to say for them?
—The same story which they all have, and the same complaint. My father came to Scadabay forty years ago, and then there were six in the place. They were quite well off, and quite independent, when these six had the place. Then the families increased, and they must needs marry, and they married ; and when a man married he required to get a house, and there was no place for him to build it except upon his father's lot. And so the town is now swelled up to eighteen families. The eighteen are making their living on the place; that is to say, each of them has a bit of the land that there is. They are each taking a share in the cultivation of the place, and so far taking a living out of it. Now this has reduced the whole of them to the same impoverished condition, and if they fall back during the next fifteen years to the same extent that they have done during the last forty, they will all be on the poor roll. Some whose names are upon the rent roll have only two sheep and two cows.

18133. Has the rent of the township been changed in the last forty years ?
—I am not aware that it has.

18134. Has the extent of land been diminished ?
—No.

18135. Have any families been brought into the township ?
—No.

18136. And forty years ago they were comfortable?
—Yes.

18137. What rent are you paying?
—£4, 12s., without taxes.

18138. What stock do you keep ?
—Three milk cows, three young ones, and twenty-five head of sheep, excluding lambs.

18139. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Whose estate are you on?
—Lord Dunmore's.

18140. Is there any land near you that you could get?
—No, we are tacked on together—a crofter population. It is crofters that adjoin us.

18141. What is the nearest place in the proprietor's lands, or in the hands of the big tacksmen?
—Cuidinish, Deirecleit, and Ceandevig.

18142. Sheriff Nicolson.
—There is no cause, then, for the crowding of the people of Scadabay in the place, except that they insisted on marrying when they were young ?
—No other reason ; but what else could they do, if they could get no additional place to occupy?

18143. Were they not getting work in the south?
—Yes, they need that, but cannot take much out of it. Every person cannot bring home money from the south by his earnings.

18144. Would it not be better for a young man to go and try his fortune away from home, than to sit, and marry, and beget children, on a miserable bit of land here ?
—It would be better to have a good comfortable living at home, than to risk the chance of straying abroad. It is not every man who could make a comfortable living by shifting about in that way.

18145. Then, I suppose, no young man ever leaves Harris with any intention of staying out of it?
—Not of their own will, if they have a place to which to return.

18146. Do you not know that noblemen and gentlemen are obliged to send away their sons wherever they can make a living for them ?
—Yes, but they send them away with plenty of money to get homes and lands for them elsewhere; and sometimes lucrative appointments, when they become gentlemen.

18147. But do you not know that many gentlemen's sons have been sent abroad without a penny in their pocket except what paid their passage?
—If such a case occurred, money would be sent after him.

18148. Then do you think the crofters are the only people who are entitled to keep their sons at home ?
—Well, we poor people sending our family away without perhaps as much money as will pay their passage, with insufficient clothing, and no education, often fear they may fare badly, and that worse may befall them. They must buy clothes with the first wages they earn, and the first £1 they can spare must be sent home to keep their father and mother alive.

18149. Is that any hardship ?
—It is only those that try it that feel the hardship of it.

18150. Do you not know that a great many of the officers in Her Majesty's army and navy, sons of noblemen and gentlemen, are barely able to keep themselves in clothes, and are not able to marry, perhaps all their lives?
—They will not have to support their fathers and mothers though, and they will not have to pay the rent of the small patch of land their father possesses.

18151. But that only applies to the case of a man with one son. Where there are several sons, do they all need to support their father and mother ?
—Where there is only one son, he must needs remain at home to till the ground.

18152. Quite right; but should not the rest go away, and should not they be content to be bachelors for a time, like other people ?
—No, a bachelor is an object of charity all the world over, and such a condition was not appointed to the children of men.

18153. Then it is the first duty of a man,—especially a Harris man,—to get married and increase the number of the inhabitants ?
—Yes, that is his first duty, and to get land to occupy it. These were the first commands he received.

18154. But that was only when there were two inhabitants in the world ?
—I do not know ; what is written is that ' He gave the land to the children of men.'

18155. Was not the command to 'increase and multiply' given only to the first pair ?
—That was quite the case, but it was added —' replenish the earth.'

18156. And have they not done so in Scadabay at any rate?
—Yes.

18157. Is it not time to stop now?
—I do not know that it is.

Tarbert, Harris, 13 June 1883 - Donald Macdonald

2010-07-24T23:44:00.001+01:00

DONALD M'DONALD, Crofter, Grosaway (74)—examined.

18117. The Chairman.
—How many families are there in Grosaway?
—Nineteen.

18118. Do you come here to represent them?
—Yes.

18119. Were you chosen by them?
—Yes.

18120. What have you got to say on their behalf?
—The place was occupied by two men formerly. The rent was £15. Now there are eight crofters, and there is not one of them without cattle and sheep except one.

18121. What do they pay for each of the eight crofts?
—About £4, 12s.

18122. Are there eleven cottars?
—Yes, there are eleven families without land, and these are a great burden upon us; for we cannot see them allowed to go without any land at all. There are three without any children of school age, and these have to pay school rates, when it is those with plenty of children—the cottars—who reap the advantage of it. Now, this is a great source and injury. Then there are others who would be very glad to get land if they only got it, and who would be more able to take it than many who have it, and who sorely need it. That is what left our place so poor. I myself was born in Rodel. I saw my mother with her youngest child taken out of the house in a blanket and laid down by the side of a dyke, and the place pulled down. My mother was in child-bed at the time. The child was only born the previous night, and my father asked M'Leod, who was proprietor at the time, whether he would not allow them to remain in the house for a few days, but permission was not given, only he came to the dykeside where she lay and asked what this was, and when he was told he asked him to lift her up and remove her to an empty barn, and it was there she was put. If these cottars were to get land, the crofters who are on the rent roll would be very much better off, for these cottars without land are of no benefit to the proprietor or crofter or anybody else—rather the reverse.

18123. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—How many families were turned out at the time you refer to in speaking about your mother ?
—Nearly forty families. The half of it was under gentlemen tacksmen. It was the clearing of that place that destroyed the country, when they were sent up to the east side.

18124. Who got the place that these forty families were removed from?
—It was M'Leod himself that took the place and kept it for two years, and afterwards he gave it to Stewart.

18125. How long did Stewart have it?
—I cannot tell. It is about sixty-six or sixty-seven years since it was cleared.

18126. And it is now in the proprietor's own hands?
—The proprietor has it now.

18127. The Chairman.
—Where did the six tenants come from that made them up to eight ?
—An uncle of mine came there first. These two men had it, and there were three or four subdivisions of their own. Then, when the place was cleared that I spoke of, other two were brought in.

18128. Where did the cottars come from ?
—They belonged to the place. Some of them lost the land that they had—others sprang up there. These are able to take land now if they got it,—some of them more able than those who have land.

Tarbert, Harris, 13 June 1883 - Ronald Macdonald

2010-07-24T23:32:00.001+01:00

RONALD MACDONALD, Taransay (48)—examined.

18095. The Chairman.
—You are brother of the tacksman of Taransay?
—Yes.

18096. Have you any statement to make to us in reference to your brother's farm ?
—I don't think that we call upon the services of these men except when we have work to do of such a kind that it needs more strength of hand than we can supply out of our own hired servants, and when we have to call upon any one of them, if the head of the family or the strong one is not able to reply to the call, we have just to take the one that is handy and ready, even though the weakest. Whenever they are working they feed along with our own servants ; and, with scarcely any exception, if they get an opportunity of fishing or of earning money elsewhere, we will be quite willing to take the services of the weaker member of the family, so as not to prejudice the case of the older and stronger in any way whatever. Last autumn, to the best of my recollection, the whole of our crops were cut with the scythe. I do not think that we called upon a man of the place to do any work beyond ferrying cattle, casting peats, and digging potatoes. In respect of kindness to the people in the event of their being in want, we would not have for ourselves without giving it to them ; and in so far as milk is concerned, I am perfectly able to testify that choppins of warm milk from the cow are sent to the weak and sickly, often without one penny being ever asked for it. I am not aware that any of them ever came in want and asked for anything that was within our house without them getting a share of it. The reason why the cow and the sheep were taken from them I am unable to speak of. The tacksman is ready to give evidence if the question is put to him. So far as the readjustment of the land question is concerned, I would personally be very willing to see it adjusted upon equitable terms towards the poor. I have myself taken their part to my own loss, as they know. But so far as the land that is at present in the possession of the tacksmen of Harris is concerned, I am convinced that the present rent of it is so heavy that crofters would be quite unable to pay that amount for it. I believe that when the information you are now collecting among the people of these places is put together, prepared, and laid before Parliament, as is meet, it is a very desirable thing that there should be a land act to adjust equitably the relations between landlord and tenant and tacksman, and that competent men, sworn valuators, should be appointed to value the land, and where necessary to reduce the rent, and where necessary to increase it. And as former evidence has been led to the effect that in any readjustment that might be made, there should be only one family upon each croft, even supposing it were done, such is the natural increase of the population that in a very short time things would be just as they are—one croft subdivided among three or four families,—and just as I considered it desirable that there should be a land act that would adjust equitably the land question by fixing a reasonable rent,—a rent reasonable to both landlord and tenant, —I also consider another act, and recommend it, under which an inquiry should be made not only into the circumstances of the people, but into the capabilities of the land, with a view to set up mills and factories in order to manufacture the produce of the land, so that what the land might yield could be manufactured and utilised within the land itself, and so provide work for those people for whom no land can be provided. The people might then have their choice either of getting suitable work here in that, way, or to those who prefer it, there should be a scheme to enable them to emigrate elsewhere if they so desired. If there should be such an act that would inquire into the circumstances of the people both in town and country, and inquire into the relationship between master and servant, and the way the one uses the other, I believe there would be fewer inmates of our poorhouses and police offices,

18097. Sheriff Nicolson.
—Is it a fact that none of the families inhabiting Taransay, except the tacksman's, have any cows ?
—So far as I am aware, they have not any just now.

18098. Do you consider that they are sufficiently supplied with milk for children from your brother's house ?
—If they require milk for sickness, we are ready to supply it gratis.

18099. Do not healthy ones require it also?
—We supply it when they are delicate, both children and grown-up people.

18100. Do you think children can be brought up healthily without milk ?
—I cannot say either young or old can be brought up so healthily without as with it.

18101. Was the statement which the previous witness made correct as to the days they had to work for your brother,—sixty days ?
—As far as I am aware, it is three or four days they make in the way of ferrying, and a week at peats and about a fortnight or twenty days at taking up the potatoes, and a very few days, if any, at cutting corn.

18102. Does that employment seriously interfere with their fishing and other employment?

18103. What is the rent of Taransay?
—I am not certain, but so far as I am aware it is over £200,—£220.

18104. Do you know what it was before, when there were crofters there ?
—It was not so much, and the former rent was £250,—a rent we never got out of the island, though we had been a very sober family.

18105. Does your brother's stock consist of both cattle and sheep?
—And horses.

18106. You breed horses?
—We do.

18107. Mr Cameron.
—Have you been in the room all to-day?—Yes.

18108. Have you heard the evidence given by the various delegates of the crofters?
—Yes.

18109. You heard the evidence given by the crofters as to their poverty and general want of comfort ?
—Yes.

18110. Do you believe that those statements are true?
—Well, I believe they are. I attribute the whole of that to the increase of the population.

18111. Have you heard any of the crofters to-day complain that their rents are excessive ?
—I do not think I have.

18112. You have not heard any crofter, under these circumstances of extreme poverty and want of comfort, ask any thing in the shape of a sworn valuation of rent ?
—No, so far as I remember, I did not.

18113. Then do I understand that your remedy for the grievances complained of by the crofters is that there should be sworn valuators to indicate what should be paid by the great tacksmen to the landlord ?
—I do so, because I consider the tacksmen are paying the highest rent, and that they have been paying a rent that the crofters could not get out of their farms.

18114. But do you consider that the grievances felt by the big tacksmen are in any way comparable to those felt by the crofters?
—Well, I do not, if it be of the least comfort to them.

18115. Do you think it natural or fair that the big tacksmen should ask such a strong measure from Government or Parliament, while the crofters, who are admittedly suffering great hardships, and labour under considerable grievances, have not to-day asked any thing of that kind?
—We do not blame the proprietors for the highness of the farm rents; we have to blame themselves, because the one is going over the other and giving a higher offer. When a farm is advertised they will over-bid each other, and when they are ruined they must give up their farm, and then the proprietor may lose a good deal by arrears, unless he recovers it out of the stock on the farm. If a land act were passed in such a way that there were so many Commissioners sworn on the side of the inhabitants, and so many on the side of the proprietor, and a judge between them, so that if there was a farm below its proper rental they could put it up in favour of the proprietor, and if it were above its proper rental they could take it down. But that the proprietor would have the option of taking any tenant who might apply.

18116. But why do you think that privilege, and that rather extraordinary step, should be taken in favour of the tacksmen, whereas you admit that to-day the crofters have not asked it for themselves ?
—The small tenants would not refuse it if it were offered to them. I do not want it for the big tacksmen any more than for the other people. I should like to get the same law for the poor and for the rich.

Tarbert, Harris, 13 June 1883 - Angus Ferguson

2010-07-24T23:25:00.001+01:00

ANGUS FERGUSON, Cottar and Fisherman, Taransay (48)—examined

18068. The Chairman.
—How many cottars are there in Taransay?
—Ten families.

18069. Were you chosen by these ten families to represent them here?
—Yes.

18070. What do you wish to say on their behalf?
—I wish to speak of the poor condition of the people ever since I first remember them. When I first remember the place my father had a holding there. The third part of the island was under crofts. There were fourteen families upon that portion. These crofts were removed when I was nine years of age, and the island was cleared for John M'Donald. The whole fourteen families were removed from the island in all directions. Some went to the south-west of Harris, some to Lewis, and others elsewhere. My father was allowed to remain by the tacksman in the place where we were when we had a croft, and that accounts for our being in the island. Ever since we lost that land we have not been able to get a holding of land since. We had nothing but to be cottars under the tacksman, and to be dealt with just as he pleased; and the arrangement between him and us, which subsisted while he was in life, was this,—we worked the land for him, and we gave him half the produce. He allowed us to keep a cow and eight sheep. His son succeeded him, and he made a different arrangement with us. We had net cow or sheep since that time. At that time we had to take to the lobster fishing and such work as goes on in the place. This tacksman gave us potato ground to the extent of four or five barrels, upon condition that we would give him in return farm service any day of the year he wished us. And now because we were in a very remote corner of the world, where few advantages could be got, we were obliged to accept these conditions, although we felt them hard. We are not allowed to sow either oats or barley, but only potatoes; and we are obliged to fish the whole year, summer and winter, autumn and spring, in order to enable us to obtain a livelihood, for this amount of potatoes does little to support us. I have been head of a family for the last twenty-six years, and during that time I have neither had cow nor sheep, and I did not earn sixpence on Taransay ever since. I have obtained my livelihood by braving many a danger upon the wild shore through the spring and winter months, where a stranger could scarcely expect that a boat would live.

18071. It is said by some people that the land is not big enough, without the help of fishing, to support all the population, and that it would be desirable to make some of them entirely fishermen. Do you think Taransay is a good station for fishermen ?
—It is a suitable fishing station, but the coast is wild and exposed, and during the winter months it may be two months, and it may be five or six weeks, before a boat could leave the shore.

18072. If they had better boats, with proper landing places, would they be able to fish more regularly ?
—It is only small boats that we have, and the fishing we prosecute does not require heavy boats, neither does the shore upon which we land them. They must be boats of such weight as we can haul ashore.

18073. Do you get any wages from the tacksman for your services, beyond the potato ground ?
—Nothing.

18074. Are you obliged to stop at home to do that service whenever it is called for?
—Well, upon certain days we must remain at home from our own fishing,—such days as when we have to ferry heavy cattle between the shore and the island, and such work as that, that requires people in order to carry it out.

18075. How many days on the average in the year are you employed in Mr Macdonald's service ?
—We work very irregularly—a bit of a day now and a bit of a day again,—but I believe, if they were all strung together, they would make about sixty full days in the year.

18076. Then how many days, broken and unbroken, are you called away from your employment by Mr Macdonald? Will it be twice a week on an average?
—Perhaps some weeks we might be called twice, and others not.

18077. Did you hear Mr Mackenzie say he thought the island would support forty families paying a rent of £5 each?
—We had suggested information to that effect to Mr Mackenzie ourselves.

18078. Then you believe forty crofters could afford to pay £5 a piece for it?
—I would think they might be inclined to pay £5 each for it. It would certainly support forty families.

18079. What would you think a fair rent for each?
—I could give no information upon that matter.

18080. What would you yourself be inclined to give for a fortieth share of the island ?
—A fortieth of it would be worth £4 or £ 5 at least.

18081. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Does Mr Macdonald live on the island ?
—Yes, sometimes. His principal dwelling is at Scaristaveg.

18082. How many farms has he got?
—Two.

18083. What stock has he on Taransay?
—The shepherd can tell; I do not know.

18084. Are there a good number of cows ?
—Yes, there are a lot of cattle.

18085. You have no sheep or cattle?
—No.

18086. Why are you not allowed to keep a cow or a sheep1?
—The will of the tacksman.

18087. Would it do very much injury to the farm if each of the cottars had a cow ?

18088. Where do you get milk?
—We get no milk at all. unless from some of the neighbours when they come ashore from the mainland.

18089. Are all the children of those cottars deprived of milk except what they get from the mainland ?
—They are.

18090. How many children, roughly speaking, may there be among those families of cottars?
—There are seventy-six inhabitants on the island. I do not know the number of children.

18091. And, old and young, they are entirely destitute of milk?
—It is only one of these that has milk— a servant of Taransay.

18092. You say you may work sixty days in the course of the year. Are we to understand and suppose you only get a wage of Is. per day? You pay £3 for the privilege of planting five barrels of potatoes ?
—That is the case, considering the calculation I have made of the days of the week.

18093. Is this labour of sixty days exacted only from the head of the family, or are the women obliged to contribute to it ?
—The head of the family does it, the women do it, and the children do it, accordingly as one is more handy when the work is needed.

18094. But there is only one member of each family bound to do it?
—Only one.

Tarbert, Harris, 13 June 1883 - John Mcleod (Tarbert)

2010-07-24T18:31:00.000+01:00

JOHN M'LEOD, Cottar, Tarbert (70)—examined.

18029. The Chairman
—Do you remember the time when your father's father was sent to Borv in 1846?
—Yes.

18030. Where was your father's family before that time?
—In Pabbay.

18031. Was he in good circumstances there ?
—Yes. They were able to support themselves, and to sell some when they were there.

18032. Do you know what stock they took with them to Borv?
—I cannot tell

18033. Had they sufficient stock for the place?
—We had not much when we went there, but our stock was increasing. We had a great deal of stock when we left it.

18034. What rent did they pay for the croft they got at Borv?
—£11, 5s. or £11, 15s.

18035. How long was your father at Borv?
—In the first place we went to we were allowed to remain three years.

18036. What was the name of the place ?
—Big Borv.

18037. Were you then removed?
—Yes.

18038. Where to ?
—Little Borv.

18039. How long did you stay there ?
—Two years

18040. Why did you leave ?
—We were put out of it.

18041. Why were you put out?
—Well, they did not wish us to remain there.

18042. Had you paid your rents?
—Not the whole of it. Some of the rent was unpaid. When the people were summoned out of this Little Borv, the factor told them that if they got security they would pay £100 at the next market, they would not be disturbed that year. The minister that was at Scarista at the time—the present minister of South Uist—offered to become security for the required amount, but they would not accept the security.

18043. Why were they removed in the first place from Big Borv?
—They wanted to add Big Borv to the tack of Scarista-vore.

18044. Were the tenants of Big Borv in arrears at that time?
—I believe they were behind with their rent. The years were very bad, and there was no price for cattle. The prices rose the very year they left, and never fell to the same point since.

18045. Had they any other debts on the stock besides the rent?
—I do not think they were in debt for which the stock could be called upon to pay.

18046. At the time they were removed from Little Borv, had all the tenants the full stock?
—The minister said at the time they were sent away, that the poorest man in the country might become security for them, because they had sufficient stock to meet the demands upon them.

18047. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—When you speak of the minister of Scarista, do you mean the parish minister of Harris ?
—Yes.

18048. Was he a man in perfectly good credit and substance?
—Well, he said himself that it was through the factor that he received his stipend, and that his stipend might be good for the sum.

18049. Who was the factor who carried this out?
—M'Donald of Rodel.

18050. Was he factor at the time this first settlement was made when they were taken out of Pabbay ?
—Yes; it was the same factor.

18051. Had Captain Sitwell been removed by the time they were put away from Borv?
—I cannot tell. It was Captain Sitwell who arranged they should be sent there.

18052. Were all the arrears that were due by your father paid at the time they were summoned out before they were allowed to remove the little stock that remained ?
—I believe not.

18053. Where did your father go after leaving Borv?
—Ardhassaig, West Loch Tarbert.

18054. Did your father build a house when he went first to Big Borv ?
—Yes, where there was not a stone upon the ground,—both house and barn.

18055. Did it necessarily involve a great expenditure to your father?
—There was not much in the outlay. The family assisted to build it.

18056. Did they get any value for the houses when they went to Little Borv ?
—Not a shilling.

18057. Then did you find the houses at Little Borv ready for you?
—There were the walls of the house.

18058. But you had to make it fit for habitation?
—Yes.

18059. Did you get compensation when they left Little Borv?
—No; but we removed the roof of it when we went away.

18060. Was it with your father's will or the will of the other tenants that they were finally removed from Little Borv?
—No; it was against their will.

18061. Did they ever get a fair chance there of getting on in the world, with these three shiftings in the course of five years ?
—The very opposite. At Ardhassaig again, after we were shifted, we were there a year without land at all. The man into whose land we came had himself cropped it that year, and so we had no crop, and that threw the family back very much.

18062. When you went to Big Borv, what time did you go to it?
—In the beginning of summer.

18063. Was there crop or house or anything there?
—Nothing; we dwelt in a bothy till we were able to build a house.

18064. When was the first rent due?
—I cannot tell.

18065. Did they pay from the very moment of entering?
—We were paying certainly. I know the first settlement we went to we were paying £ 17, but I cannot tell what was paid after that.

18066. How often were the rents uplifted?
—Twice a year. It was taken from them at any time.

18067. Do you recollect your father going to the rent collection at Martinmas that year ?
—I do not remember that he did.

Tarbert, Harris, 13 June 1883 - Angus Campbell

2010-07-24T18:24:00.003+01:00

ANGUS CAMPBELL, Crofter and Fisherman, Plocropool (59)—examined.

18024. The Chairman.
—Who chose you to come here ?
—I am here to represent seven townships.

18025. How many people will there be in those townships?
—There are sixty-seven families in the whole of these places. When I took land there thirty-two years ago there were only twenty-two.

18026. Were you freely elected a representative of these sixty-seven families ?
—Yes.

18027. What have you got to say on their behalf ?
—I have to say that they are very poor, and that the one half of them injure the other half. Also that of the twenty-two crofts—there are only three which are not subdivided. The people who occupy these three are certainly better off than the rest of the people, the inference from which is that it is want of land that is impoverishing them all. I have to say that some of the crofts upon which there was only one family when I came there, have now five families upon them. I have nine of a family myself of whom four are sons, ranging from twenty-nine to twenty years of age, and in a very short time, through the operation of the same cause that impoverished my neighbours, I expect to be worse off than any of them. It was mentioned here to-day that some people were taking their sea-ware from Skye and Uist, and other places far away. I have a boat of seven tons' weight, and with my four sons I take the sea-ware from these places and further off. When I am able to bring this manure home early in the season I can sow my crops in better time than my neighbours, who have not the same advantages in this respect that I have, are able to do. If it were not for the kindness of the people towards one another, both in allowing those who are not able to take sea-ware from a distance, to gather what comes upon the shore at home, and also in giving them patches of ground to cover up with sea-ware so as to make use of it, I don't know what might become of them at all. I tried various pursuits in order to make a livelihood, within the last thirty-two years, but among them all I have not been able to find one equal to cultivating,—that is to taking my livelihood out of the land. I have of such land as is going a sufficient amount to maintain myself, and my family are springing up, and there is nothing left to distribute among them. A month ago my fourth son left the island without being too communicative with me about the matter; but he took some of the neighbours into his confidence, and I got a letter from Glasgow, and he is now upon his way to Queensland. His letter was, that when the oldest—Alexander—was to settle down he could get a portion of the croft, and when the second was to settle down—Murdoch—he was to get a share, but what was to remain to him in the land of his birth, and therefore, he would require to go away. Where we live man's physical strength holds not forth long. When we make our creels for carrying up this sea-ware from the boats to the crofts, we must make them of different sizes according to the strength of the person who has to carry them, for they all must take a share in it. I once cut peats where I now grow crops, and by continual working at it during the winter,—draining it,—I have been able to take some reasonable crop out of it, but my bodily strength cannot improve it more. When I came to the place first, if I had a barrel of potatoes to sell I could sell it for 2s. but now if it could be sold at all, such is the overcrowding and scarcity of potatoes that it costs 5s. There is no need to talk much longer of the matter. I don't wish to blame either factor or proprietor in the least for bringing about the state of matters that exist. The main cause has been the squatting of the people of the place, and not one of them getting an opportunity of removing elsewhere. The people of the Bays in Harris have no wool of their own, but they purchase wool elsewhere, and their wives through the night manufacture it into cloth. I myself get it for them,—as much as 500 stones in one year, from tacksmen through Uist and elsewhere, at prices ranging from 14s. to 26s. per stone. This enterprise was carried on through the kindness of the Dowager Countess and Mrs Thomas, and except for the proceeds of this manufacture, I do not know how these people could live at all. The people are quite accustomed to work bad land. There is no good land for them. The little good there is, they were driven out of it. So much am I accustomed to this that I could not work good land if I had it now. It is needless to expatiate upon it. Suppose I should go on till to-morrow morning the burden of it would be that the only remedy is additional land for the people. I, along with my family, am able to keep a fishing boat agoingLuskin upon the road leading to the churchyard, for I have seen the coffins carried upon our shoulders dragged through the flood—six men strung together, and following the course of the
stream in order to keep themselves from being swept away with the bier upon their shoulders. I was a young man in South Harris at Obbe, and there was a miller there, and I remember two boats laden with grain going to Stornoway distillery, and sold at Is. a peck, as the export of the district beyond what was necessary for the support of the inhabitants. I also know that when my father had plenty of land, such was the comfortable mode in which we lived, that I myself as a young lad was throwing the old potatoes out into the sea in order to find a place in which to store up the new potatoes in the beginning of autumn. I believe that if the township on which I live was occupied by one man instead of six, as it is, the same thing might occur again.

18028. Are you aware that potatoes nowhere grow so well as they did before 1847?
—They cannot grow so well as to supply potatoes to all the people of the place. I do not want a single rig of land for myself. I have quite sufficient for my own personal purposes. But if my family would wish to follow the same pursuit, there is no land for them, and if I were to share with them the small portion I have myself, I would be worse off than ever I was before. It is the want of land that ruins them. I have paid rent to five factors, and I never owed a shilling upon rent collection day; but instead of having a whole lot, if I had only half a lot, I might now have been probably £ 10 behind.