Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

sight, it will not be easy to account for the terror with which the young man called God to witness that he saw a dead man in his cart.

It is not my wish nor is it my interest to add one word to or change a syllable in the foregoing incidents. They are here told simply as I heard them related by old people in the neighbourhood, two of whom personally recollected some of the events that happened in and even before the eventful year of 1745. I was born and brought up at Lietrie, within half a mile of where the man was thus murdered for the crime of wearing a strip of plaited tartan round his hips. The combat at Bacidh took place within a mile and a half of Lietrie, and the diabolical murder of the innocent infant was committed at Tombuie, within four miles of the same place.

Let no one imagine that I refer to those sanguinary times with the view of disparaging the noble profession of arms. My opinion, on the contrary, is, that so long as Christian as well as Pagan nations continue to countenance the scandal of war, the character and profession of the soldier cannot bo too much refined and elevated. (To be Continued.)

EVICTIONS IN THE SCOTTISH HIGHLANDS.

The editor of the Celtic Magazine has, in greater measure than almost any one known to the present generation, rendered valuable service to the Highlands by his protracted and assiduous researches into the history of their clans, and his vast acquaintance with Celtic literature, to the enrichment and preservation of which he has devoted the labours of his pen for many years past. In the pamphlet before us Mr Mackenzie makes an important contribution to our knowledge of the subject of the depopulation of the Highlands and its causes. He presents a series of vivid sketches of the evictions which have taken place at Glengarry, Strathglass, Kintail, Glenelg, Skye, Uist, Barra, Coigeach, Sutherland, and elsewhere since the last futile attempt of the Pretender to recover the throne of the Stuarts in 1745, beginning with the Glengarry expulsion of 1853. Some of the individual cases of hardship and suffering which resulted from that cruel act, perpetrated, too, mainly at the instance of a woman, are, even at this distance of time, painful to read The position of the Highland crofter is a subject on which Mr Mackenzie may well claim to speak with authority. It is to be deplored that much that has been written on this subject has been done by men who have had no previous real knowledge of the facts, and who, when opportunity presented, seem to have neglected to avail themselves of it, being content to obtain a one-sided view from persons whose interests naturally presupposed bias, and whose information should therefore have been received with all the more caution. Mr Mackenzie can speak from "bitter experience of the crofter's lowly condition, contracted means, hardships, and incessant struggles with life generally." His picture is, we believe, a thoroughly truthful and honest one. He shows how utterly impossible it is even with the best management of the average croft—from one to four acres—to raise sufficient for keeping the crofter's family above starvation point, and his evidence is minute and veracious. To all interested in the population question in the Highlands, and in the question of agriculture as pursued in the north of Scotland, this pamphlet will afford much information which will be valuable, because, in our opinion, thoroughly reliable,—Edinluryh Daily Review.

€omsporibtntt.

WERE HAVELOCK'S HIGHLANDERS COWARDS?

THE 78TH HIGHLANDERS AND THE EDITOR OF THE ARMY AND NAVY

GAZETTE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CELTIC MAGAZINE.

Inverness, 8th April 1881.

Sir,—I am able and willing to defend myself with the pen, or any other weapon if need be; but when my mouth is systematically closed in one direction, I must seek a fresh voice elsowhere. My letters having been refused publication in the Army and Navy Gazette, and a grave charge cast by that journal upon the honour of the "Ross-shire Buffs," having to my mind been very insufficiently atoned for, I request you will be good enough to give a place in your pages to all that has passed on this head, and, along with others, lend me your generous help to show the baselessness of the calumny, as also the poor chance of fairplay a writer, striving to be conscientious, may expect, if he have the temerity to attack such a Gargantuesque monopoly us a pocket Military Paper, edited by a crack ex-war correspondent.

The following appeared prominently in large type on the fourth page of the Army and Navy Gazette, of 12th March 1881 :—

'"A British ollicer,' says General W. to Colonel C, 'is bound to tell the truth.' 'I beg your pardon, General,' replied G, 'it is the one thing a British General cannot do—sometimes.' The force of that remark is in the application of it. No general can find fault with his men in public despatches, though he may rate them as Havelock did the 78th, when he told them they had the cholera in their hearts, as well as their stomachs. Sir G. Colley, at all events, took on himself all the blame of the failure at Ingogo."

Several officers, qualified to know, having written to contradict the foregoing, the following paragraph appeared on page eight of the next issue of the Army and Navy Gazette, March 19th, 1881. Tin's disclaimer, such as it is, is not given any prominence, but is huddled away into the Regimental news, and printed in small typo :—

"78th Regiment.—A ' Staff Captain' writes:—'The remark of the late Sir Henry Havelock, to which you refer, did not apply to that fine old regiment, whose deeds, from the first to the last of the Mutiny, have not been surpassed since the British Army was first created. Being on the Staff of the force then under General Havelock's command, I can speak with authority as to the fact.' Several correspondents have corroborated this statement, but no one has denied that the words were used by the irritated General, although it cannot be supposed the gallant Rossshire Buffs ever deserved them."

Seeing the inadequacy of the disclaimer, I wrote to the editor of the Army and Navy Gazette as follows :—

Naval And Military Club, 23d March 1881.

Sib,—In your issue of the 12th inst., a leading item appeared stating that on a certain occasion General Havelock charged the 78th Highlanders with cowardice. On the 19th you inserted a quotation from the letter of a " Staff Captain" denying this, and added "No one has denied that the words were used by the irritated General." They were possibly used during the first battle of Butseerut Gunge, but this is outside the point. You then continue " although it cannot be supposed the gallant Ross-shire Buffs ever deserved them." This is only a qualified disclaimer, and it was inserted most obscurely, under the heading "78th Regiment," in the Regimental news (where arrivals, departures, and such trifles appear), whereas the original calumny appeared in large print, in a prominent part of the paper. The regiment is at present in Candahar, and is unable to defend itself, but, on its behalf, I demand that a disclaimer shall be printed in your next issue, and given equal prominence to the original article complained of, and further, that the writer of the said item, if he be possessed of any sense of fairness, shall express regret for having most needlessly wounded the feelings of a largo body of officers. No one should make statements which ho is not prepared to substantiate, and therefore, under these circumstances. I consider my demand to be nothing beyond what is due.—I am, sir, your obedient servant,

Colin Mackenzie, late Captain, 78th Highlanders.

This letter was not published, but on the central page of the Army and Navy Gazette of 26th March 1881 (the most prominent part of the paper), the following graceful comment upon it appeared:—

"'Colin Mackenzie, late Captain 78th Highlanders.' writes on March 23 from ' the Naval and Military Club,' to observe that, on the 12th inst, what he calls 'a leading item' appeared in this paper, 'stating that on a certain occasion General Havelock charged the 78th Highlanders with cowardice.' No leading or misleading item of the sort ever appeared in this paper; but alluding to a well-known incident of Havelock's march, we quoted an angry phrase of his, addressed, as we erroneously thought, to the 78th, and sets (sic) the matter right, without naming the other corps, in our next issue. "We are not going to accept Captain Colin Mackenzie's opinion as to the qualification or non-qualification of our ' disclaimers,' as ho calls our remark; nor are we going to allow him to appropriate our spare as he thinks fit. The writer of the paragraph is as much interested in the honour and good repute of the 78th Highlanders as the ' late Captain ' in question, and he is the last man in the world to wound the feelings of tho officers of the regiment. If the 'late Captain' would but condescend to read what was said carefully he will see, we hope and believe, that there could not have been, and that there was not any intention to disparage a corps which does not need tho advocacy of any officer to protect its reputation, nor dread the efforts of any 'defender' to injure it"*

After this attack upon me (when I considered I had only been doing my duty in defonding the honour of my old corps), I, in self-defence, wrote the following letter to the Editor of tho Army and Navy Gazette. trusting to his sense of fair play to publish it:—

Naval And Military Club, March 31, 1881. Sir,—I do not question the good taste of the notice you vouchsafe to

* The Editor would appear to bo answerable for the grammar of this paragraph; unless indeed, as is not unlikely, the printer's devil may have been among the compositors.

my letter of the 23d inst. in your issue of the 26th, and I appreciate to a certain degree the disclaimer (I again use the woid advisedly) which you make as to the charge of cowardice against the 78th Highlanders. But I cannot pass it bye without certain observations.

You deny that your charge implied as much, but I leave it to the public to say what they infer from such a phrase as "the cholera in their heart?, as well as their stomachs." You say that if I " would but condescend to read what was said carefully," I would see, you "hope and believe," your want of intention "to disparage a corps," &c. My perception is hardly so keen.

You say "the writer of the paragraph," or item, "is as much interested in the honour and good repute of the 78th Highlanders as the 'late Captain."' Hardly! If the writer had ever served in that corps he would never have perpetrated his blunder—and if he never did serve in that corps, then he cannot possibly have its honour so near at heart as one who did serve.

You have lost sight of the whole gist of my letter of the 23d, which was to draw attention to the fact, that your reply to the letters of your correspondents was insufficient and placed in an obscure part of your paper, and that I demanded a full denial, to which there should be given a prominence equal to that of the original calumny.

Doubtless evo this you have received sufficient assurances of your error. I am satisfied with the upshot, and will not say who has eaten the leek, though I might add—

The truth you speak, doth lack some gentleness
And time to speak it in: you rub the sore.
When you should bring the plaster.

I have stated my name, and am willing to quote my authorities, whereas your informant keeps his incognito.

You have stated that you are not going to accept my opinions, nor are you going to allow me to appropriate your space as I think fit. My letter, which you did not publish, and which was simply in defence of my old corps, surely does not warrant such an answer; and, in common fairness, I must ask you to insert this reply in your issue of Saturday. At the same time I reserve my undoubted right to reproduce the whole of this matter, together with such further observations as I may think warranted, in columns other than your own.—I am, Sir, your obedient servant, Colin Mackenzie, late Captain, 78th Highlanders.

The Army and Navy Gazette of the 2d April 1881 was published in due course, but it contained neither my letter nor any comment upon it; although it exhibited one of the editorial staff endeavouring to blunder out of another "inaccuracy." Inaccuracy is the curse of journalism, and lest I incur its odium, I will at once state my authorities, as against my masked opponent, who apparently drew his long-bow at a venture. I have it from Sir Henry Havelock Allan, General Havelock's son, and a host of officers, non-commissioned officers, and private soldiers, who served with Havelock's column, and whoso names would fill several pages of your Magazine, that General Havelock Never told the 78th that "they had the cholera in their hearts as well as their stomachs." That gallant old veteran, General Sir Patrick Grant, who was Commander-in-Chief in India, from the death of General Anson till the arrival of Lord Clyde, and consequently during Havelock's march, never heard of such a speech being addressed to the 78th. If he had, would he he likely to esteem it an honour to he their full Colonel to-day?

If Havelock's true opinion of the 78th is required, his own words will be sufficient to prove it. In his confidential report on the regiment, just before leaving Persia, he says :—

"There is a fine spirit in the ranks of this regiment. I am given to understand that it behaved remarkably well in the affair of Khooshab, near Bushire, which took place before I reached the army; and during the naval action on the Euphrates, and its landing here, its steadiness, zeal, and activity under my own observation were conspicuous. The men have been subjected in this service to a good deal of exposure, to extremes of climate, and have had heavy work to execute with their intrenching tools, in constructing redoubts and making roads. They have been, while I have had the opportunity of watching them, most cheerful; and have never seemed to regret or complain of anything but that they had no further chance of meeting tho enemy. I am convinced the regiment would be second to none in the service, if its high military qualities were drawn forth. It is prowl of its colours, its tartan, and its former achievements."

Havelock, writing to General Neill, after the second battle of Butseerut Gunge, 5th August 1857, says:—"If I might select for praise without being invidious, I should say they (the Madras Fusiliers) and tho Highlanders are the most gallant troops in my little force."

After the third battle of Butseerut Gunge, Havelock published an Order of the Day, 12th August 1857, of which the following forms part: —"Tho Fusiliers and the Highlanders were, as usual, distinguished, The Highlanders, without firing a shot, rushed with a cheer upon the enemy's redoubt, carried it, and captured two of the three guns with which it was armed. If Colonel Hamilton can ascertain tho officer, noncommissioned officer, or soldier, who first entered this work, the Brigadier will recommend him for tho Victoria Cross."*

Describing the grand charge of the 78th Highlanders at the battle of Cawnpore, 16th July 1857, Havelock writes:—"The opportunity hadarrived for which I have long anxiously waited, of developing the prowess of the 78th Highlanders. Three guns of the enemy were strongly posted behind a lofty hamlet well intrenched. I directed this regiment to advance, and never have I witnessed conduct more admirabla They were led by Colonel Hamilton, and followed him with surpassing steadiness and gallantry under a heavy fire. As they approached the village, they cheered and charged with the bayonet, the pipes sounding the pibroch. Need I add that the enemy fled, and the village was taken, and the guns were captured?"

In his Order of the Day after Cawnpore, he said :—" Soldiers! your General is satisfied, and more than satisfied, with you. He has never seen steadier or more devoted troops; but your labours are only beginning. Between the 7th and 16th you have, under the Indian sun of

July, marched 126 miles, and fought four actions

Highlanders! it was my earnest desire to afford you tho opportunity of showing how your predecessors conquered at Maida; you have not de

* Lieutenants Campbell and Crowe entered together. Campbell took cholera next day and died, and Crowe was recommended for the V.C. He did not, however, live lonp; to wear hia honours.

« AnteriorContinuar »