On this site have been posted transcripts of the findings of the Napier Commission during its sessions in Inverness-shire in the summer and autumn of 1883. More formally, this Commission is known as The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Condition of Crofters and Cottars in the Highlands and Islands.
West Highland College UHI - Mallaig digitised the thousands of
pages of the report. These have been made available on the website of the UHI Centre for History, 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 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 in 1883, presenting facts and information on the population, as well as the political, historical and social climate of the time.
The text of the original report has been broken up into locations (listed in the panel to the right). On the front page of each location, the witnesses have been listed by category (e.g. crofters, clergymen, factors &c).
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 six members of the Commission taking evidence in Ross-shire were:
Lord NAPIER AND ETTRICK, K.T., Chairman.
Sir KENNETH S. MACKENZIE, Bart.
DONALD CAMERON, Esq. of Lochiel, M.P.
C. FRASER MACKINTOSH, Esq., M.P.
Sheriff NICOLSON, LL.D.
Professor MACKINNON, M.A.
It should be noted that evidence was taken in the western parts of Ross-shire in July and August 1883, with a separate session at Dingwall on 10 October of the same year.
Lord Napier was not present during the session at Letterfearn.
Appendix LXXI.
Appendix LXXI.
STATEMENT by KENNETH MACKENZIE, Crofter, Scoraig
I regret that, in consequence of misunderstanding the purport of the question put to me by the Royal Commissioners, when giving evidence before them at Ullapool on the 30th of July last, I did there and then erroneously state that the proprietor had never given any assistance to the crofters here in building their houses, or in making any other improvements.
Sincerely indulging the hope that it is not yet too late to retract that misstatement, I beg to take this opportunity of declaring that the present proprietor of the estate of Dundonnell, as well as his immediate predecessors, had not only given timber free of any charge whatever for the building of their tenants houses, and the repairing and constructing of their boats, & c , but have also granted various sums of money for the same benevolent purpose.
His
X KENNETH MACKENZIE, Lots of Scoraig.
cross.
Archibald M'Niven, witness
John M'lver, do.
Duncan M'Gregor, do.
STATEMENT by KENNETH MACKENZIE, Crofter, Scoraig
I regret that, in consequence of misunderstanding the purport of the question put to me by the Royal Commissioners, when giving evidence before them at Ullapool on the 30th of July last, I did there and then erroneously state that the proprietor had never given any assistance to the crofters here in building their houses, or in making any other improvements.
Sincerely indulging the hope that it is not yet too late to retract that misstatement, I beg to take this opportunity of declaring that the present proprietor of the estate of Dundonnell, as well as his immediate predecessors, had not only given timber free of any charge whatever for the building of their tenants houses, and the repairing and constructing of their boats, & c , but have also granted various sums of money for the same benevolent purpose.
His
X KENNETH MACKENZIE, Lots of Scoraig.
cross.
Archibald M'Niven, witness
John M'lver, do.
Duncan M'Gregor, do.
Glenelg, 4 August 1883 - William Grant and Alexander Mclennan (Letterfearn)
WILLIAM GRANT and ALEXANDER M'LENNAN, Letterfearn, Glenshiel—examined.
32531. The Chairman.
—I understand you have some request to make regarding the proceedings at yesterday's meeting at Letterfearn?
—We wish your Lordship and the Commission to receive a short statement in supplement of the evidence which we gave yesterday.
32531*. Please to show it to me?
—It is as follows :
—' We, the Letterfearn delegates, beg to make known to the Royal Commission that it is not alone for the small piece of land which was offered to some of the Letterfearn people for £15, that the farm of Druidaig was reduced £60, but on account also of the shooting and lodge, which was attached to the said farm, being taken away from it last term, It was reduced £60, on which the farmer got more than £100 every year. The statement by Mr M'Lean, the factor, may have led the Royal Commission to believe that £60 was taken off Druidaig for the small piece of land which was offered to the Letterfearn people for £15. But if the fourth delegate was called he would have explained this matter, and as he was not called we have thought it best to give this note to the Royal Commission. Regarding Ruarach, which was offered to some of the Letterfearn people, the tenant, who had it previous to that time, was obliged to give it up by losing a great deal of money on it. Therefore, we thought it better not to go under a burden which would be impossible to carry. We thought Nonach the same.
—-WILLIAM GRANT, ALEXANDER M'LENNAN, delegates.'
Your statement will be added to the evidence, and considered along
with the rest.
32531. The Chairman.
—I understand you have some request to make regarding the proceedings at yesterday's meeting at Letterfearn?
—We wish your Lordship and the Commission to receive a short statement in supplement of the evidence which we gave yesterday.
32531*. Please to show it to me?
—It is as follows :
—' We, the Letterfearn delegates, beg to make known to the Royal Commission that it is not alone for the small piece of land which was offered to some of the Letterfearn people for £15, that the farm of Druidaig was reduced £60, but on account also of the shooting and lodge, which was attached to the said farm, being taken away from it last term, It was reduced £60, on which the farmer got more than £100 every year. The statement by Mr M'Lean, the factor, may have led the Royal Commission to believe that £60 was taken off Druidaig for the small piece of land which was offered to the Letterfearn people for £15. But if the fourth delegate was called he would have explained this matter, and as he was not called we have thought it best to give this note to the Royal Commission. Regarding Ruarach, which was offered to some of the Letterfearn people, the tenant, who had it previous to that time, was obliged to give it up by losing a great deal of money on it. Therefore, we thought it better not to go under a burden which would be impossible to carry. We thought Nonach the same.
—-WILLIAM GRANT, ALEXANDER M'LENNAN, delegates.'
Your statement will be added to the evidence, and considered along
with the rest.
Letterfearn, 3 August 1883
Witnesses
Murdo Macrae, cottar, Morvich
Alexander Mclellan & Duncan Macrae, Morvich
Rev Roderick Morrison, Minister of Kintail
John Macrae & Farquhar Macrae, Bundaloch
Murdo Macrae, crofter & shoemaker, Inverinet
Alexander Macrae, crofter & shoemaker, Inverinet
Rev Roderick Morison, Minister of Kintail
William Grant and Alexander Maclennan, Letterfearn
Alexander Macrae, cottar & fisherman, Letterfearn
Christopher Macrae and David Macrae, Camusluinie
Rev John Cameron, RC Priest, Dornia
Roderick Maclean, Factor to Sir Alexander Matheson, Lochalsh
James Watson, Local manager for Sir Alexander Matheson
William Grant and Alexander Mclennan, Letterfearn (additional submission given at Glenelg on 4 August 1883)
Murdo Macrae, cottar, Morvich
Alexander Mclellan & Duncan Macrae, Morvich
Rev Roderick Morrison, Minister of Kintail
John Macrae & Farquhar Macrae, Bundaloch
Murdo Macrae, crofter & shoemaker, Inverinet
Alexander Macrae, crofter & shoemaker, Inverinet
Rev Roderick Morison, Minister of Kintail
William Grant and Alexander Maclennan, Letterfearn
Alexander Macrae, cottar & fisherman, Letterfearn
Christopher Macrae and David Macrae, Camusluinie
Rev John Cameron, RC Priest, Dornia
Roderick Maclean, Factor to Sir Alexander Matheson, Lochalsh
James Watson, Local manager for Sir Alexander Matheson
William Grant and Alexander Mclennan, Letterfearn (additional submission given at Glenelg on 4 August 1883)
Appendix LXXIII.
Appendix LXXIII.
STATEMENT by JOHN FORSYTH, Esq., Balnagown Estates Office,
PARKHILL, N.B., November 26, 1883.
Lord Napier asked me at Dingwall what increase of rent Mr George Anderson paid for Kincardine and Ardcbornie when he became tenant of these farms. I send with this a statement which shows the rent the late Dr Gordon paid for Kincardine and Ardchomie, also the rents paid by Dr Gordon's sub-tenants to him, with their names. It shows also the rent at which Mr Anderson took Kincardine and Ardchronie, and the rents now paid by the late Dr Gordon's sub-tenants direct to the Balnagown estate. The statement also shows that all of Dr Gordon's tenants are still on the property, with the exception of Alexander M'Lean. He left of his own free will, to prosecute his trade of shoemaker to Bonar village, and as the place he vacated was in the middle of the arable land, it was included in the let to Mr Anderson. Besides the rents paid by Dr Gordon's sub-tenants, they paid him poor-rates, but only those now paying rents of £4, or above, pay
rates.
The statement sent shows the increase of rent when Mr Anderson became tenant of Kincardine and Ardchomie to be £10, 8s. 6d.; it also shows that the crofters' rents were reduced considerably. The rent paid by Mr Anderson for Kincardine and Ardchronie is now higher than when his lease commenced, but this is caused by changes since then. There is also an increase of rent on Badvoon, held by Mr Anderson, of £15, but there are no crofters on the farm ; it is solely a sheep farm.
JOHN FORSYTH.
Rent paid by the late Dr Gordon for Kincardine and Ardchronie ; also for Meal Mill-
Kincardine and Ardchronie rent: £115
Meal Mill: £50
Subtotal: £165
Rents paid by Dr Gordon's sub-tenants to him, with their names:
Kenneth M'Nab: £4, 14s
Alexander Campbell: £4, 15s
Finlay Macrae: £2
Alexander Fraser: £10
Ann Macgregor: £0, 10s
John M'Leod: £4, 4s
Donald Ross ' Gow,': £5
Alexander Ross: £1
Janet Ross ' Callum: £1
David Ross: £2
William M'Kay: £1
Alexander M'Lean: £6
David Murray, for Meal Mill: £37
TOTAL £79, 3s 0d
Rent at which Mr George Anderson, Bonar, became tenant of Kincardine and Ardchronie, but not including Meal Mill: £108
Rents now paid by Dr Gordon's sub-tenants direct to Balnagown:
Kenneth M'Nab: £4, 14s
Alexander Campbell: £4, 5s
Finlay Macrae: £1, 10s
Alexander Fraser: £8, 15s
Ann Macgregor: £0, 5s
John M'Leod: £3, 15s 6d
Donald Ross ' Gow,': £3, 4s
Alexander Ross: £1
Janet Ross ' Callum: £1
David Ross: £1, 10s
William M'Kay: £0, 10s
David Murray, for Meal Mill: £37
TOTAL: £67, 8s 6d
Add Mr George Anderson's rent, as above: £108
Subtotal: £175, 8s 6d
Total increase of rent on let of farm and crofts: £10, 8s 6d
STATEMENT by JOHN FORSYTH, Esq., Balnagown Estates Office,
PARKHILL, N.B., November 26, 1883.
Lord Napier asked me at Dingwall what increase of rent Mr George Anderson paid for Kincardine and Ardcbornie when he became tenant of these farms. I send with this a statement which shows the rent the late Dr Gordon paid for Kincardine and Ardchomie, also the rents paid by Dr Gordon's sub-tenants to him, with their names. It shows also the rent at which Mr Anderson took Kincardine and Ardchronie, and the rents now paid by the late Dr Gordon's sub-tenants direct to the Balnagown estate. The statement also shows that all of Dr Gordon's tenants are still on the property, with the exception of Alexander M'Lean. He left of his own free will, to prosecute his trade of shoemaker to Bonar village, and as the place he vacated was in the middle of the arable land, it was included in the let to Mr Anderson. Besides the rents paid by Dr Gordon's sub-tenants, they paid him poor-rates, but only those now paying rents of £4, or above, pay
rates.
The statement sent shows the increase of rent when Mr Anderson became tenant of Kincardine and Ardchomie to be £10, 8s. 6d.; it also shows that the crofters' rents were reduced considerably. The rent paid by Mr Anderson for Kincardine and Ardchronie is now higher than when his lease commenced, but this is caused by changes since then. There is also an increase of rent on Badvoon, held by Mr Anderson, of £15, but there are no crofters on the farm ; it is solely a sheep farm.
JOHN FORSYTH.
Rent paid by the late Dr Gordon for Kincardine and Ardchronie ; also for Meal Mill-
Kincardine and Ardchronie rent: £115
Meal Mill: £50
Subtotal: £165
Rents paid by Dr Gordon's sub-tenants to him, with their names:
Kenneth M'Nab: £4, 14s
Alexander Campbell: £4, 15s
Finlay Macrae: £2
Alexander Fraser: £10
Ann Macgregor: £0, 10s
John M'Leod: £4, 4s
Donald Ross ' Gow,': £5
Alexander Ross: £1
Janet Ross ' Callum: £1
David Ross: £2
William M'Kay: £1
Alexander M'Lean: £6
David Murray, for Meal Mill: £37
TOTAL £79, 3s 0d
Rent at which Mr George Anderson, Bonar, became tenant of Kincardine and Ardchronie, but not including Meal Mill: £108
Rents now paid by Dr Gordon's sub-tenants direct to Balnagown:
Kenneth M'Nab: £4, 14s
Alexander Campbell: £4, 5s
Finlay Macrae: £1, 10s
Alexander Fraser: £8, 15s
Ann Macgregor: £0, 5s
John M'Leod: £3, 15s 6d
Donald Ross ' Gow,': £3, 4s
Alexander Ross: £1
Janet Ross ' Callum: £1
David Ross: £1, 10s
William M'Kay: £0, 10s
David Murray, for Meal Mill: £37
TOTAL: £67, 8s 6d
Add Mr George Anderson's rent, as above: £108
Subtotal: £175, 8s 6d
Total increase of rent on let of farm and crofts: £10, 8s 6d
Appendix LXXIV.
Appendix LXXIV.
PETITION from 400 Fishermen of Easter Ross.
The Petition of the undersigned four hundred fishermen residing in Hilton, Balintore, and Park, in the parish of Team, and Shandwick in the parish of Nigg, and of other influential gentlemen residing in the neighbourhood of the said villages, hereby most humbly and respectfully sheweth—
1. That the aforesaid fishing villages are in close proximity to each other, and that the inhabitants thereof have no land, but depend almost entirely on the fishing industry.
2. That, both for the encouragement of the said industry, and safety and convenience of tha fishermen, there is neither a suitable harbour nor a pier at any of these villages.
3. That, in consequence of these two wants, your petitioners cannot use their deep sea-going boats except at the time of the herring fishing, and when stationed in other harbours, but must, during the rest of the year, use small boats of about 16 feet in length, which must be daily hauled beyond watermark.
4. That, as these small boats must be used in winter, our lives are very often imperilled, and our industry is very much hindered.
5. That, as there is no harbour on the Ross-shire side between Cromarty and Portmahomack, having a sea-coast of about fourteen miles, a suitable harbour at any of the said villages would, besides promoting local industry, be most convenient for any ship or boat in distress in the Moray Firth to run into.
6. May it therefore please you, lords and gentlemen, to take the foregoing statement into your honourable consideration ; to consider our grievances ; to place our humble request on your record ; and to recommend strongly to Parliament to have a suitable harbour and pier erected here to advance the industry of the place, to have a place of safety for all ships, and to enable us to ameliorate our condition and make a decent livelihood.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray
Signed by 400 fishermen,
October 1883.
PETITION from 400 Fishermen of Easter Ross.
The Petition of the undersigned four hundred fishermen residing in Hilton, Balintore, and Park, in the parish of Team, and Shandwick in the parish of Nigg, and of other influential gentlemen residing in the neighbourhood of the said villages, hereby most humbly and respectfully sheweth—
1. That the aforesaid fishing villages are in close proximity to each other, and that the inhabitants thereof have no land, but depend almost entirely on the fishing industry.
2. That, both for the encouragement of the said industry, and safety and convenience of tha fishermen, there is neither a suitable harbour nor a pier at any of these villages.
3. That, in consequence of these two wants, your petitioners cannot use their deep sea-going boats except at the time of the herring fishing, and when stationed in other harbours, but must, during the rest of the year, use small boats of about 16 feet in length, which must be daily hauled beyond watermark.
4. That, as these small boats must be used in winter, our lives are very often imperilled, and our industry is very much hindered.
5. That, as there is no harbour on the Ross-shire side between Cromarty and Portmahomack, having a sea-coast of about fourteen miles, a suitable harbour at any of the said villages would, besides promoting local industry, be most convenient for any ship or boat in distress in the Moray Firth to run into.
6. May it therefore please you, lords and gentlemen, to take the foregoing statement into your honourable consideration ; to consider our grievances ; to place our humble request on your record ; and to recommend strongly to Parliament to have a suitable harbour and pier erected here to advance the industry of the place, to have a place of safety for all ships, and to enable us to ameliorate our condition and make a decent livelihood.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray
Signed by 400 fishermen,
October 1883.
Appendix LXXV.
Appendix LXXV.
STATEMENT by ANDREW SMITH, Esq., Law Agent, Dingwall.
DINGWALL, 13th October 1883.
I observe from the newspaper reports of the evidence given before the Royal Commission at Dingwall, on Wednesday last, that two of the delegates from the Heights of Strathpeffer made some remarks which concern me as law agent for Her Grace the Duchess of Sutherland and Countess of Cromarty. Donald Macdonald, Heights of Strathpeffer, stated that "five or six of the crofters that could sign their names received their leases at once, and all others were told to go to the estate law agent, Mr Smith, Dingwall, where they got the leases signed, each tenant paying Mr Smith ten shillings, but none of them ever received their leases, although they had made repeated application for them." John Rose, Heights of Inchvanie, repeats this statement.
The matter is a small one, but as the statement is inaccurate, and is calculated at the first glance to give rise to an entirely erroneous impression that an injustice was done to the crofters, I think it right that the true state of the case should be laid before your Lordship and the other members of the Royal Commission.
In the first place, the leases referred to were signed in 1860, when it was requisite that two notaries should subscribe a deed on behalf of a person who could not write. The ten shillings alluded to by the delegates were not paid by these crofters to me, but to the notaries who were employed by them to sign their leases for them ; I am not a notary, and I received no part of this money, nor did I make any charge whatever against the tenants for my services in the matter. I have reason to believe that the deligates who made this misleading statement were quite aware how the case really stood. With regard to the statement that the leases so signed were not received by the tenants, I beg to explain that these leases consisted of printed forms, and were all in the same terms. The tenants' names and the description of their holding were filed into them in the office of the late Mr Scott, then factor on the Cromarty estates, and, in the case of those crofters who could not write, he sent the printed forms to me that I might superintend their notarial execution. This was all I had to do in the matter, and on the leases being signed they were all returned by me to Mr Scott to be completed. I have no doubt that he duly handed duplicates or copies of them to the tenants, and the fact that the principal copies of the leases—whether signed by the crofters themselves or notarially—are still in the Cromarty Estates Office, while the duplicates are not, shows that this must have been done. The admission of the delegates that the crofters who could write got their leases (duplicates), also supports this, as Mr Scott could have no reason for making a distinction between the tenants who could write and those who could not.
But in any case this pretended " grievance " is a purely fanciful one, for, as ia well known, the leases, on being executed, constituted at once a good and binding title in favour o^ the crofters, who, in point of fact, possessed under and derived the benefit of them, during their whole currency, as much as if they had held them in their own hands. The principal lease is, in Scotland, always retained by the proprietor ; the delivery of a copy to the tenant is not required to make it binding, and where the lease is printed, and its terms well known, there is no object to be served, even of convenience, in the tenant getting such a copy.
As to Macdonald's statement that he applied to me five times for his lease, and was referred by me to Mr Scott, and by Mr Scott to me, I have no recollection of this, and I am quite certain the statement is erroneous.
ANDW. SMITH.
STATEMENT by ANDREW SMITH, Esq., Law Agent, Dingwall.
DINGWALL, 13th October 1883.
I observe from the newspaper reports of the evidence given before the Royal Commission at Dingwall, on Wednesday last, that two of the delegates from the Heights of Strathpeffer made some remarks which concern me as law agent for Her Grace the Duchess of Sutherland and Countess of Cromarty. Donald Macdonald, Heights of Strathpeffer, stated that "five or six of the crofters that could sign their names received their leases at once, and all others were told to go to the estate law agent, Mr Smith, Dingwall, where they got the leases signed, each tenant paying Mr Smith ten shillings, but none of them ever received their leases, although they had made repeated application for them." John Rose, Heights of Inchvanie, repeats this statement.
The matter is a small one, but as the statement is inaccurate, and is calculated at the first glance to give rise to an entirely erroneous impression that an injustice was done to the crofters, I think it right that the true state of the case should be laid before your Lordship and the other members of the Royal Commission.
In the first place, the leases referred to were signed in 1860, when it was requisite that two notaries should subscribe a deed on behalf of a person who could not write. The ten shillings alluded to by the delegates were not paid by these crofters to me, but to the notaries who were employed by them to sign their leases for them ; I am not a notary, and I received no part of this money, nor did I make any charge whatever against the tenants for my services in the matter. I have reason to believe that the deligates who made this misleading statement were quite aware how the case really stood. With regard to the statement that the leases so signed were not received by the tenants, I beg to explain that these leases consisted of printed forms, and were all in the same terms. The tenants' names and the description of their holding were filed into them in the office of the late Mr Scott, then factor on the Cromarty estates, and, in the case of those crofters who could not write, he sent the printed forms to me that I might superintend their notarial execution. This was all I had to do in the matter, and on the leases being signed they were all returned by me to Mr Scott to be completed. I have no doubt that he duly handed duplicates or copies of them to the tenants, and the fact that the principal copies of the leases—whether signed by the crofters themselves or notarially—are still in the Cromarty Estates Office, while the duplicates are not, shows that this must have been done. The admission of the delegates that the crofters who could write got their leases (duplicates), also supports this, as Mr Scott could have no reason for making a distinction between the tenants who could write and those who could not.
But in any case this pretended " grievance " is a purely fanciful one, for, as ia well known, the leases, on being executed, constituted at once a good and binding title in favour o^ the crofters, who, in point of fact, possessed under and derived the benefit of them, during their whole currency, as much as if they had held them in their own hands. The principal lease is, in Scotland, always retained by the proprietor ; the delivery of a copy to the tenant is not required to make it binding, and where the lease is printed, and its terms well known, there is no object to be served, even of convenience, in the tenant getting such a copy.
As to Macdonald's statement that he applied to me five times for his lease, and was referred by me to Mr Scott, and by Mr Scott to me, I have no recollection of this, and I am quite certain the statement is erroneous.
ANDW. SMITH.
Appendix LXXVI.
Appendix LXXVI.
STATEMENT by WILLIAM BRUCE, Esq., M.D., Dingwall.
DINGWALL, 12th December 1883.
I beg leave to lay the accompanying statement before you, and I trouble you on the plea that I was cited to give evidence at Dingwall, but from want of time I did not get an opportunity to do so.
I have had considerable experience of east coast fishermen, and happened to learn that they had at one time combined farming with fishing. In order to make quite sure of this I wrote to a fisherman friend lately inquiring more particularly as to tenure, &c. He could not give m e any information on these points, but he told me that the old men of the village where he lived told him that at one time the fishermen had each a plot of ground; that it lay in a particular locality, and was shifted when the village itself was removed. He also spoke of a neighbouring village, from which (he said) a valuable piece of land was taken away and a worthless portion given in its stead fit only to grow willows.
I need scarcely add that the fishermen lament the loss of their lands, and believe they would be of great advantage to them at present, and that I hold such a belief to be fallacious, and that they would not be so thriving as they now undoubtedly are if they had what they desired. These fishermen, particularly in some villages, have much improved within m y recollection. Indeed, twenty-five or thirty years ago, in many instances, I am convinced, they were as far behind to-day as they are at present in many parts of the west coast. Education, going to sea, and teetotalism have been the main agents in their improvement. At the present day many of these people practically fish all the year round, going in the spring to Lewis, Harris, &c, and then back to their own coasts, from there to Lowestoft, Yarmouth, and other places on the English coast, and home once more for the winter white fishing and preparing their nets and boats for another season.
It is often said that west coast fishermen are lazy, and many reasons, such as that of race, or even the comparative safety of fishing, have been given to account for this unfortunate state of things. Cheapness and abundance of food, and, of course, inherited tendencies, have much to do with it; but the writer believes the difference in energy to be mainly owing to the nearness or remoteness of the markets in the two cases. On the east coast there has been, from the presence of a large inland population, always a ready sale for fish. Thirty or more years ago this was chiefly, on the north-east coast at least, by way of barter, but was none the less liked by the fisher folk. Now they have got railways, and a steady demand at all seasons. Give the west coast fisherman equivalent means of transporting his commodities and in time he will become as industrious as his east coast relation. It humbly seems to the writer that the only way to secure this is by establishing a west coast steam shipping company on the lines of the East Coast Railway, viz., a daily service of steamers from end to end of the land, calling, as a matter of course, at every small (fishing) station once a day or oftener. One considerable drawback to the concentration of fishers in villages on the east coast I found, when practising among them, to he disease and death among their children. Thinking the Commissioners would be interested in a comparative view of the sicknesses and diseases of the inhabitants on either side of Scotland, I have tried to collect information from medical men and statistics from registrars. These data are not easy to obtain. A wise government has by law compelled medical men to certify the cause of death of every patient they may happen to see. This of course entails loss of time, trouble, and the expense of postage to the poor doctor. Will it be believed that the same government actually makes no use whatever of this information, and refuses to be at the expense of publishing bills of mortality in Scotland except in the case of the eight large towns. The registrars of one west highland and two east coast parishes have, however, obliged me by furnishing returns, and I give below a comparison founded on this limited amount of data.
The Commissioners will notice (first) that the mortality among children below the age of five is nearly three times as much among east coast fishermen as compared with west coast fishermen and crofters.
Second, that, contrary to what has been often alleged, consumption is much more frequent on the west coast (Query—Do west coast migrants catch the disease in the south and return to die ? and, if so, is this from contagion,—according to a well-known law that such immigrants are more liable to be infected than residents—or is it from the confined (and poisonous) air they are compelled to breath in the dens of our great cities ?)
Third, Epidemics are not so frequent but are probably equally fatal on the west as on the east coast. Certainly my returns show diphtheria to have been very fatal on the west coast.
Fourth, In both groups many of the natives live to beyond seventy.
Fifth, Dyspepsia is very common.
With reference to the second head or infant mortality, m y correspondents and myself agree that the main cause is the want of a steady and proper supply of milk. I a m happy to hear that in Kincardineshire farmers and it to be to their profit to meet this demand, and are supplying milk in abundance to neighbouring fishing villages. Doubtless, by and by, this will be the rule all over the east coast. Another project has been set on foot in Forfarshire, which, if it were extended to the west coast, would be of very great value to older children. Dyspepsia, as I have said, is a very common and a very depressing disease amongst crofters and fishermen generally. I attribute a great deal of this to improper feeding at the young and growing time of life, and I a m sure nothing would tend more to raise up a healthy, hardy, energetic race than good food at so trying an age. This one good meal of nourishing broth or soup would do much to supply, and if southern charity would lend itself to establish such kitchens in connection with all west coast
schools, it would, I am sure, produce the maximum of good and the minimum of evil.
TABLES OF COMPARATIVE MORTALITY IN THREE SELECTED PARISHES.
(1) West Coast Crofters and Fishermen ; (2) East Coast Fishermen (chiefly) ; (3) East Coast Crofters, during 1880,1881, and 1882.
1. Mortality below the age of five.
West Coast Crofters and Fishermen, 8 to 25 per cent, of whole mortality.
East Coast Crofters, about the same.
East Coast Fishermen, 40 to 50 per cent
2. Consumption.
West Coast Crofters and Fishermen, 14 to 25 per cent
East Coast Crofters, 2 to 4 per cent.
East Coast Fishermen, about 10 per cent
3. Epidemics
1. West Coast Crofters and Fishermen, less frequent than in other groups.
2. East Coast Crofters, less fatal, typhoid perhaps more so.
3. East Coast Fishermen, commoner of diphtheria, perhaps less fatal than in (1).
4. Bronchitis
Common in children among both East and West Coast Fishermen.
5. Dyspepsia
Very common in all three groups.
6. Ophthalmic Diseases.
Common in Skye, and perhaps also in other parts of the west coast
7. Rheumatism.
Common in all three groups.
8. Longevity.
A large proportion live to he over neventy in all three groups.
STATEMENT by WILLIAM BRUCE, Esq., M.D., Dingwall.
DINGWALL, 12th December 1883.
I beg leave to lay the accompanying statement before you, and I trouble you on the plea that I was cited to give evidence at Dingwall, but from want of time I did not get an opportunity to do so.
I have had considerable experience of east coast fishermen, and happened to learn that they had at one time combined farming with fishing. In order to make quite sure of this I wrote to a fisherman friend lately inquiring more particularly as to tenure, &c. He could not give m e any information on these points, but he told me that the old men of the village where he lived told him that at one time the fishermen had each a plot of ground; that it lay in a particular locality, and was shifted when the village itself was removed. He also spoke of a neighbouring village, from which (he said) a valuable piece of land was taken away and a worthless portion given in its stead fit only to grow willows.
I need scarcely add that the fishermen lament the loss of their lands, and believe they would be of great advantage to them at present, and that I hold such a belief to be fallacious, and that they would not be so thriving as they now undoubtedly are if they had what they desired. These fishermen, particularly in some villages, have much improved within m y recollection. Indeed, twenty-five or thirty years ago, in many instances, I am convinced, they were as far behind to-day as they are at present in many parts of the west coast. Education, going to sea, and teetotalism have been the main agents in their improvement. At the present day many of these people practically fish all the year round, going in the spring to Lewis, Harris, &c, and then back to their own coasts, from there to Lowestoft, Yarmouth, and other places on the English coast, and home once more for the winter white fishing and preparing their nets and boats for another season.
It is often said that west coast fishermen are lazy, and many reasons, such as that of race, or even the comparative safety of fishing, have been given to account for this unfortunate state of things. Cheapness and abundance of food, and, of course, inherited tendencies, have much to do with it; but the writer believes the difference in energy to be mainly owing to the nearness or remoteness of the markets in the two cases. On the east coast there has been, from the presence of a large inland population, always a ready sale for fish. Thirty or more years ago this was chiefly, on the north-east coast at least, by way of barter, but was none the less liked by the fisher folk. Now they have got railways, and a steady demand at all seasons. Give the west coast fisherman equivalent means of transporting his commodities and in time he will become as industrious as his east coast relation. It humbly seems to the writer that the only way to secure this is by establishing a west coast steam shipping company on the lines of the East Coast Railway, viz., a daily service of steamers from end to end of the land, calling, as a matter of course, at every small (fishing) station once a day or oftener. One considerable drawback to the concentration of fishers in villages on the east coast I found, when practising among them, to he disease and death among their children. Thinking the Commissioners would be interested in a comparative view of the sicknesses and diseases of the inhabitants on either side of Scotland, I have tried to collect information from medical men and statistics from registrars. These data are not easy to obtain. A wise government has by law compelled medical men to certify the cause of death of every patient they may happen to see. This of course entails loss of time, trouble, and the expense of postage to the poor doctor. Will it be believed that the same government actually makes no use whatever of this information, and refuses to be at the expense of publishing bills of mortality in Scotland except in the case of the eight large towns. The registrars of one west highland and two east coast parishes have, however, obliged me by furnishing returns, and I give below a comparison founded on this limited amount of data.
The Commissioners will notice (first) that the mortality among children below the age of five is nearly three times as much among east coast fishermen as compared with west coast fishermen and crofters.
Second, that, contrary to what has been often alleged, consumption is much more frequent on the west coast (Query—Do west coast migrants catch the disease in the south and return to die ? and, if so, is this from contagion,—according to a well-known law that such immigrants are more liable to be infected than residents—or is it from the confined (and poisonous) air they are compelled to breath in the dens of our great cities ?)
Third, Epidemics are not so frequent but are probably equally fatal on the west as on the east coast. Certainly my returns show diphtheria to have been very fatal on the west coast.
Fourth, In both groups many of the natives live to beyond seventy.
Fifth, Dyspepsia is very common.
With reference to the second head or infant mortality, m y correspondents and myself agree that the main cause is the want of a steady and proper supply of milk. I a m happy to hear that in Kincardineshire farmers and it to be to their profit to meet this demand, and are supplying milk in abundance to neighbouring fishing villages. Doubtless, by and by, this will be the rule all over the east coast. Another project has been set on foot in Forfarshire, which, if it were extended to the west coast, would be of very great value to older children. Dyspepsia, as I have said, is a very common and a very depressing disease amongst crofters and fishermen generally. I attribute a great deal of this to improper feeding at the young and growing time of life, and I a m sure nothing would tend more to raise up a healthy, hardy, energetic race than good food at so trying an age. This one good meal of nourishing broth or soup would do much to supply, and if southern charity would lend itself to establish such kitchens in connection with all west coast
schools, it would, I am sure, produce the maximum of good and the minimum of evil.
TABLES OF COMPARATIVE MORTALITY IN THREE SELECTED PARISHES.
(1) West Coast Crofters and Fishermen ; (2) East Coast Fishermen (chiefly) ; (3) East Coast Crofters, during 1880,1881, and 1882.
1. Mortality below the age of five.
West Coast Crofters and Fishermen, 8 to 25 per cent, of whole mortality.
East Coast Crofters, about the same.
East Coast Fishermen, 40 to 50 per cent
2. Consumption.
West Coast Crofters and Fishermen, 14 to 25 per cent
East Coast Crofters, 2 to 4 per cent.
East Coast Fishermen, about 10 per cent
3. Epidemics
1. West Coast Crofters and Fishermen, less frequent than in other groups.
2. East Coast Crofters, less fatal, typhoid perhaps more so.
3. East Coast Fishermen, commoner of diphtheria, perhaps less fatal than in (1).
4. Bronchitis
Common in children among both East and West Coast Fishermen.
5. Dyspepsia
Very common in all three groups.
6. Ophthalmic Diseases.
Common in Skye, and perhaps also in other parts of the west coast
7. Rheumatism.
Common in all three groups.
8. Longevity.
A large proportion live to he over neventy in all three groups.
Appendix LXXVII
STATEMENT by J. M'GILCHRIST ROSS, Distiller and Farmer, Teaninich, Alness, Ross-shire
I have to thank you for allowing me to bring before you certain suggestions which I wish to make for remedying the painful state of matters which now exists in the Highlands, and with which the public are so familiar through your labours. As I go about a good deal, and come in contact with many people of all classes, I may allude—though it is well known to you—to the present state of excitement which prevails throughout the country on the land question. I don't speak of agitation carried on by unprincipled demagogues ; but it is a fact that good men and true, throughout the country, are feeling that something is far wrong, and that something must be done by and by for the public safety. Up till recent years the upper classes—mostly acting in the capacity of landlords—were looked on as representatives and guardians of the public interest; and the instinctive feeling, that every man has, or should have, a right to a " local habitation," was considered as enjoyed through them. But a social revolution Is taking place: the people are becoming more self-reliant through the spread of education and the more general diffusion of wealth ; and successive inroads are being made on the ancient privileges of the governing classes, inherited or purchased, which are now culminating in the question being raised whether, in the interests of the community, any individual should have an intrinsic right of property in the limited solum of our native country ?
Trenchant works insisting on the rights of the people are in wide circulation. I am not ashamed to say that I have read some of them, and I think that their influence consists in their containing a great deal of truth. I need not describe to you such works as George on Progress and Poverty, and A. R. Wallace on the Nationalization of the Land. Such works as these are leavening the people. I sincerely regret that Mr. Wallace (who has an eminent position in the scientific world), after showing the evil, in such a masterly style, which cannot fail to bring home conviction to the reader, and even inspire him with feelings of indignation, should lend the sanction of his great name to the proposal of an unjust and Impracticable remedy. It is a fact that property in land ia recognised by the law equally with property in other things. The law says a man can do with his own what he likes, consistent with the interests of the community ; and we know, from the painful results of the inquiries of this Commission, that the law permits —nay, enforces—many deeds of moral injustice and oppression. I therefore say that any legal rights should not be taken from proprietors, even in the public interest, without compensation. I say also that the universal demand made by the delegates, that they should have fixity of tenure, irrespective of compensation to proprietors, is not just. Nevertheless I say further, that not even fixity of tenure, but absolute negotiable tenantright for the cultivator—in fact, everything but the solum of the land—must be given before the land question is satisfactorily settled. Now I by no means propose that this should be universally done and at once. It is impracticable without a revolution, which God forbid. But much can be done gradually and partially—the worst cases of dislocation of the old system, say in the Highlands, being taken up first. Now the question is, how is this to be carried out without injustice to the proprietors ? I admit there are great difficulties ; but I venture to submit a scheme for your consideration which may fairly solve the problem. I propose that a Land Court—having, in the meantime, a jurisdiction limited to that part of Scotland which lies north of the Caledonian Canal —should be instituted, armed with comprehensive powers by Act of Parliament. And think that a better Land Court could not be sought than this Commission. In order to lighten its labours, salaried inspectors would require to be appointed in certain districts. Powers would also have to be conferred upon the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to administer the financial part of the scheme. I would give a right to the people of a discontented district to petition the Court to send an inspector to inquire into the state of matters as between them and their landlord. They must show that within a circumscribed area, formerly cultivated and pastured, they can divide the land among themselves and stock it, each family having a sufficient lot to live on, the extent to be decided by the Court,—say a minimum of seven acres arable with pasture, or thirty acres arable without pasture. Some must emigrate ; and I may say here, that I am sure great assistance would be given by well-doing Highlanders, and other friends abroad and in the large towns,—who keenly sympathize with the crofters,—In the carrying out of the arrangement in most cases where required. The Court being satisfied, from the report of their inspector, that arrangements would be made to comply with these requirements, the marked-off land would be fenced, and purchased by compulsory valuation from the proprietor, by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, with national money. No great demand would at any time be made on the Exchequer for this purpose—I mean, not as much as would affect the money market. I am aware, if such were the case, much opposition might be expected to the scheme from certain quarters. After acquiring the land, the Commissioners would divide the value thereof into two parts. One part—the solum value—to be held as permanent State property, the rent or tax on which would be preferable to all other burdens. It would be the duty of the inspectors of the Court to see that land so acquired, Is held rigidly under the regulations, namely, that it must be cultivated by the occupier and those in his employ, who must also reside on it, but it must never be let. It may be sold, and must be sold if the land tax is not paid punctually. Any holding may be subdivided or added to, but not above or below a certain extent prescribed. The other part into which the values of the land is proposed to be divided—that is, the amount paid to the proprietor after the deduction of the solum value, and which I call tenant-right—must be acquired by the holder. This might be done either by paying the whole of the money at once to the Commissioners, or it could be paid in instalments, principal and interest, in a certain number of years—4 per cent, on the tenant-right value would pay it in forty years, or 6½ per cent, in twenty-five years, as in the case of Government money lent for drainage. This would be a second preferable claim on the cultivator ; and should it not be paid regularly, he must sell out his interest. It will be observed that the cultivator's paid-up interest in the tenant-right, which is nil at first, becomes more valuable year by year, thus increasing the security of the loan by the State. The Court would have no difficulty in determining the districts to which the scheme should be applied in the first place, having before it the disclosures made at some of the sittings of this Commission ; and public opinion would not long allow the districts which have been depopulated and are fit for human habitation, to be overlooked. The Court, on the other hand, would not give encouragement to the occupation if places where climate, and altitude will not admit of the means of subsistence ; the clamour against the legitimate purposes of sport, to which many parts of the Highlands are devoted, and for which they are alone suited, would thus cease.
Now many incidents connected with this scheme,—some favourable, others unfavourable,—will occur to you, but I hope the former will preponderate. What will the proprietors say to it? No doubt in many cases they will not like the idea of their properties being cut up, even though they get compensation. But then the public good is to be considered in the first place. It is a grave question for consideration, whether it will not be better to remove a clamant grievance, and so enlist the sympathies of all good and true men on the side of existing authority, rather than allow an agitation perilous to the commonwealth, to go on, all the more formidable because it has, to a great extent, a benevolent and patriotic object. The incubus of the close monoply of land accompanied by landlord patronage and factor tyranny, demoralizing alike to all concerned, is becoming more and more felt as the masses are acquiring enlightenment and feelings of selfrespect. I say the monopoly ; for I hold that, under the present state of the land laws, it is practically impossible for any but a minute fraction of the population to obtain, what every human heart naturally yearns for,—a right to occupy and enjoy, irrespective of the sweet will of any superior, a portion, however small, of the soil of his country. I repeat, that the present system is a monoply, and as such I attack it. I don't deny that in presenting this scheme to the Commission, I do so with the hope of its more extensive adoption. I do not aim at the abolition of landlordism. I wish to see another system side by side with it. If a man, having the choice of being a freeman in his native country, prefers to take the use of a landlord's capital, and pay him a just rent therefor, he may do so. Such a relation, being free on both sides, will be a cordial one, and of a very different character from that which now so extensively and so unhappily prevails between landlord and tenant, and which it should be the aim of every right-thinking man to ameliorate.
J. M'GlLCHRIST ROSS.
COUL COTTAGE, BY ALNESS,
6th Nov. 1883.
I have to thank you for allowing me to bring before you certain suggestions which I wish to make for remedying the painful state of matters which now exists in the Highlands, and with which the public are so familiar through your labours. As I go about a good deal, and come in contact with many people of all classes, I may allude—though it is well known to you—to the present state of excitement which prevails throughout the country on the land question. I don't speak of agitation carried on by unprincipled demagogues ; but it is a fact that good men and true, throughout the country, are feeling that something is far wrong, and that something must be done by and by for the public safety. Up till recent years the upper classes—mostly acting in the capacity of landlords—were looked on as representatives and guardians of the public interest; and the instinctive feeling, that every man has, or should have, a right to a " local habitation," was considered as enjoyed through them. But a social revolution Is taking place: the people are becoming more self-reliant through the spread of education and the more general diffusion of wealth ; and successive inroads are being made on the ancient privileges of the governing classes, inherited or purchased, which are now culminating in the question being raised whether, in the interests of the community, any individual should have an intrinsic right of property in the limited solum of our native country ?
Trenchant works insisting on the rights of the people are in wide circulation. I am not ashamed to say that I have read some of them, and I think that their influence consists in their containing a great deal of truth. I need not describe to you such works as George on Progress and Poverty, and A. R. Wallace on the Nationalization of the Land. Such works as these are leavening the people. I sincerely regret that Mr. Wallace (who has an eminent position in the scientific world), after showing the evil, in such a masterly style, which cannot fail to bring home conviction to the reader, and even inspire him with feelings of indignation, should lend the sanction of his great name to the proposal of an unjust and Impracticable remedy. It is a fact that property in land ia recognised by the law equally with property in other things. The law says a man can do with his own what he likes, consistent with the interests of the community ; and we know, from the painful results of the inquiries of this Commission, that the law permits —nay, enforces—many deeds of moral injustice and oppression. I therefore say that any legal rights should not be taken from proprietors, even in the public interest, without compensation. I say also that the universal demand made by the delegates, that they should have fixity of tenure, irrespective of compensation to proprietors, is not just. Nevertheless I say further, that not even fixity of tenure, but absolute negotiable tenantright for the cultivator—in fact, everything but the solum of the land—must be given before the land question is satisfactorily settled. Now I by no means propose that this should be universally done and at once. It is impracticable without a revolution, which God forbid. But much can be done gradually and partially—the worst cases of dislocation of the old system, say in the Highlands, being taken up first. Now the question is, how is this to be carried out without injustice to the proprietors ? I admit there are great difficulties ; but I venture to submit a scheme for your consideration which may fairly solve the problem. I propose that a Land Court—having, in the meantime, a jurisdiction limited to that part of Scotland which lies north of the Caledonian Canal —should be instituted, armed with comprehensive powers by Act of Parliament. And think that a better Land Court could not be sought than this Commission. In order to lighten its labours, salaried inspectors would require to be appointed in certain districts. Powers would also have to be conferred upon the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to administer the financial part of the scheme. I would give a right to the people of a discontented district to petition the Court to send an inspector to inquire into the state of matters as between them and their landlord. They must show that within a circumscribed area, formerly cultivated and pastured, they can divide the land among themselves and stock it, each family having a sufficient lot to live on, the extent to be decided by the Court,—say a minimum of seven acres arable with pasture, or thirty acres arable without pasture. Some must emigrate ; and I may say here, that I am sure great assistance would be given by well-doing Highlanders, and other friends abroad and in the large towns,—who keenly sympathize with the crofters,—In the carrying out of the arrangement in most cases where required. The Court being satisfied, from the report of their inspector, that arrangements would be made to comply with these requirements, the marked-off land would be fenced, and purchased by compulsory valuation from the proprietor, by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, with national money. No great demand would at any time be made on the Exchequer for this purpose—I mean, not as much as would affect the money market. I am aware, if such were the case, much opposition might be expected to the scheme from certain quarters. After acquiring the land, the Commissioners would divide the value thereof into two parts. One part—the solum value—to be held as permanent State property, the rent or tax on which would be preferable to all other burdens. It would be the duty of the inspectors of the Court to see that land so acquired, Is held rigidly under the regulations, namely, that it must be cultivated by the occupier and those in his employ, who must also reside on it, but it must never be let. It may be sold, and must be sold if the land tax is not paid punctually. Any holding may be subdivided or added to, but not above or below a certain extent prescribed. The other part into which the values of the land is proposed to be divided—that is, the amount paid to the proprietor after the deduction of the solum value, and which I call tenant-right—must be acquired by the holder. This might be done either by paying the whole of the money at once to the Commissioners, or it could be paid in instalments, principal and interest, in a certain number of years—4 per cent, on the tenant-right value would pay it in forty years, or 6½ per cent, in twenty-five years, as in the case of Government money lent for drainage. This would be a second preferable claim on the cultivator ; and should it not be paid regularly, he must sell out his interest. It will be observed that the cultivator's paid-up interest in the tenant-right, which is nil at first, becomes more valuable year by year, thus increasing the security of the loan by the State. The Court would have no difficulty in determining the districts to which the scheme should be applied in the first place, having before it the disclosures made at some of the sittings of this Commission ; and public opinion would not long allow the districts which have been depopulated and are fit for human habitation, to be overlooked. The Court, on the other hand, would not give encouragement to the occupation if places where climate, and altitude will not admit of the means of subsistence ; the clamour against the legitimate purposes of sport, to which many parts of the Highlands are devoted, and for which they are alone suited, would thus cease.
Now many incidents connected with this scheme,—some favourable, others unfavourable,—will occur to you, but I hope the former will preponderate. What will the proprietors say to it? No doubt in many cases they will not like the idea of their properties being cut up, even though they get compensation. But then the public good is to be considered in the first place. It is a grave question for consideration, whether it will not be better to remove a clamant grievance, and so enlist the sympathies of all good and true men on the side of existing authority, rather than allow an agitation perilous to the commonwealth, to go on, all the more formidable because it has, to a great extent, a benevolent and patriotic object. The incubus of the close monoply of land accompanied by landlord patronage and factor tyranny, demoralizing alike to all concerned, is becoming more and more felt as the masses are acquiring enlightenment and feelings of selfrespect. I say the monopoly ; for I hold that, under the present state of the land laws, it is practically impossible for any but a minute fraction of the population to obtain, what every human heart naturally yearns for,—a right to occupy and enjoy, irrespective of the sweet will of any superior, a portion, however small, of the soil of his country. I repeat, that the present system is a monoply, and as such I attack it. I don't deny that in presenting this scheme to the Commission, I do so with the hope of its more extensive adoption. I do not aim at the abolition of landlordism. I wish to see another system side by side with it. If a man, having the choice of being a freeman in his native country, prefers to take the use of a landlord's capital, and pay him a just rent therefor, he may do so. Such a relation, being free on both sides, will be a cordial one, and of a very different character from that which now so extensively and so unhappily prevails between landlord and tenant, and which it should be the aim of every right-thinking man to ameliorate.
J. M'GlLCHRIST ROSS.
COUL COTTAGE, BY ALNESS,
6th Nov. 1883.
Letterfearn, 3 August 1883 - James Watson
JAMES WATSON, Local Manager for Sir Alexander Matheson (42)—examined.
31706. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Do you wish to make any statement ?
—There was a statement made by the Avernish delegate yesterday, that none of the natives would be employed on the estate, and I beg to say that there are no other parties employed on the estate but natives, except a few who are employed at skilled labour. These we were obliged to import, to carry on the works. Those people we imported at the time when we commenced the heavy works, and we have still kept them on to do our work ; but we have not imported any labour from any place. We have always employed native labour to do the unskilled work; we never have any occasion to employ foreign labour when we can get natives to do our work. At present some of our best artisans are natives —carpenters and others— it is only the foreman that is foreign to the place. The tenants and cottars of Avernish made overtures to me to get a portion of the ground at present leased to Mr Brown. They are cottars as able as most of the present tenants to pay for a share of this land, and the cottars came as well as the tenants. I represented this particularly to Sir Alexander Matheson, but he did not feel disposed to divide the place into so many small lots, and the matter was left over without anything particular being done. The tenants did not say what rent they were prepared to pay; but a resident on the place, who made overtures for about three-fifths, would not give more than £25, and the Messrs Brown pay £60, so that would have reduced the rent to a trifle over £40. The Kinnamoine delegate made a statement personal to myself, which, I beg to say, was a most unfounded fabrication, because such conduct as he attributed to me I would not use to the lowest creature. I know this country, and I don't know any person I would be inclined to do such a thing to. There is no people that I respect more than the crofters, and I think the statement which was made was a downright fabrication. Again, he said that they improved all their crofts. Sir Alexander Matheson expended £100 on their crofts for enclosures, draining, and trenching, and to this delegate's father the late Mr Mackenzie gave £ 10 to improve his house; and all the others are offered wood and lime to build their houses and barns if they wish it. Again, he said they male overtures to me to get barns built; but on these small holdings Sir Alexander does not wish to build barns on interest, because would raise the rent so much that the people could not by any means pay. We offered hawthorn wood and lime free to do these works. Again, there was a question put by Lord Napier to Mr M'Lean which he did not answer satisfactorily. I think, in the interest of the proprietor. Lord Napier tried to say
31707. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—You must not use these words 'Lord Napier tried to say.'
—Mr Watson. That there were ameliorations paid to the tenants in several cases where the tenants had been removed to another place. It has always been usual to give ameliorations for the houses.
31708. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Lord Napier asked whether ameliorations were given?
—Yes, and Mr MLean did not say.
31708.Professor Mackinnon.
—He said no cases had ever arisen?
—In my experience cases have arisen.
31709. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—And ameliorations have been given ?
—Yes, I think that is all I have to say. With regard to the bridge at Camusluinie, I may say that a bridge to suit the people would cost the proprietor at least £500, because the stream is very considerable—nearly 700 yards wide.
31709.Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Why did you not contradict the statement of the delegate from Kinnamoine yesterday in his presence?
—I did not observe it until it was pointed out to me afterwards.
31706. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Do you wish to make any statement ?
—There was a statement made by the Avernish delegate yesterday, that none of the natives would be employed on the estate, and I beg to say that there are no other parties employed on the estate but natives, except a few who are employed at skilled labour. These we were obliged to import, to carry on the works. Those people we imported at the time when we commenced the heavy works, and we have still kept them on to do our work ; but we have not imported any labour from any place. We have always employed native labour to do the unskilled work; we never have any occasion to employ foreign labour when we can get natives to do our work. At present some of our best artisans are natives —carpenters and others— it is only the foreman that is foreign to the place. The tenants and cottars of Avernish made overtures to me to get a portion of the ground at present leased to Mr Brown. They are cottars as able as most of the present tenants to pay for a share of this land, and the cottars came as well as the tenants. I represented this particularly to Sir Alexander Matheson, but he did not feel disposed to divide the place into so many small lots, and the matter was left over without anything particular being done. The tenants did not say what rent they were prepared to pay; but a resident on the place, who made overtures for about three-fifths, would not give more than £25, and the Messrs Brown pay £60, so that would have reduced the rent to a trifle over £40. The Kinnamoine delegate made a statement personal to myself, which, I beg to say, was a most unfounded fabrication, because such conduct as he attributed to me I would not use to the lowest creature. I know this country, and I don't know any person I would be inclined to do such a thing to. There is no people that I respect more than the crofters, and I think the statement which was made was a downright fabrication. Again, he said that they improved all their crofts. Sir Alexander Matheson expended £100 on their crofts for enclosures, draining, and trenching, and to this delegate's father the late Mr Mackenzie gave £ 10 to improve his house; and all the others are offered wood and lime to build their houses and barns if they wish it. Again, he said they male overtures to me to get barns built; but on these small holdings Sir Alexander does not wish to build barns on interest, because would raise the rent so much that the people could not by any means pay. We offered hawthorn wood and lime free to do these works. Again, there was a question put by Lord Napier to Mr M'Lean which he did not answer satisfactorily. I think, in the interest of the proprietor. Lord Napier tried to say
31707. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—You must not use these words 'Lord Napier tried to say.'
—Mr Watson. That there were ameliorations paid to the tenants in several cases where the tenants had been removed to another place. It has always been usual to give ameliorations for the houses.
31708. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Lord Napier asked whether ameliorations were given?
—Yes, and Mr MLean did not say.
31708.Professor Mackinnon.
—He said no cases had ever arisen?
—In my experience cases have arisen.
31709. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—And ameliorations have been given ?
—Yes, I think that is all I have to say. With regard to the bridge at Camusluinie, I may say that a bridge to suit the people would cost the proprietor at least £500, because the stream is very considerable—nearly 700 yards wide.
31709.Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Why did you not contradict the statement of the delegate from Kinnamoine yesterday in his presence?
—I did not observe it until it was pointed out to me afterwards.
Letterfearn, 3 August 1883 - Roderick Maclean
RODERICK MACLEAN, Factor to Sir Alexander Matheson, Lochalsh—examined.
31629. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—You wish to make some remarks upon the evidence which has been given to-day ?
—I do. ' With reference to Dornie and Bundaloch, in 1852 part of the graziugs was occupied by Duncan and John Macmillan at a rent of £60. In 1862, as no rent could be got from the stance-holders, the grazings some of them held were taken from them and addedto those held by the Macmillans, at an additional rent of £40, making the rent of Bundaloch £100, at which it is at present let on lease to John Macrae. When Sir Alexander came into possession of the estate in 1851, the rent of the whole arable and grazings of Dornie and Bundaloch was £271. It is now £219. In March last a petition was presented to Sir Alexander by twenty-one of the Bundaloch stance-holders for land. This he cannot give without breaking a lease. Inquiry has been made into the circumstances of the petitioners, which brought out that only one (the Bundaloch shepherd) could stock a lot, another partially, seventeen have no means, and two are in receipt of parochial relief. In 1844, previous to the potato disease, the arrears against the Dornie and Bundaloch crofters and stance-holders was £2170, 18s. 5d.'
31630. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—-Over 200 years ?
—-I don't know how long. All of them were in arrears except two. At Whitsunday 1852, the first year of Sir Alexander's possession, only eighteen paid in full, twenty partially, and eighty-six were in arrears amounting to £119, 14s. 5d. The statement was made that the arrears were handed down from one proprietor to another, but Sir Alexander Matheson began with a clean sheet. I met the people last spring and collected them into Dornie school, and endeavoured to give them a little knowledge of agriculture, because, I am sorry to say, they are bad farmers. Nobody taught the poor people, and I thought I would begin by giving them an elementary lesson, showing how the soil is formed by atmospheric action. I also told them that the earth-worm was a far better drainer than the Dornie people, and the man thought I was making an earth-worm of himself. I found it was a mistake to speak to them, for they could not follow me out; but the fault is that they are not taught. I hope there is no person more lenient than I am, and I would wish to see them educated. If they were educated they would be as able and as willing workers as any other people, but until they are taught we cannot expect so much of them as of those who are taught. With regard to the statements which have been
made about deer forests, I referred to them yesterday. The proprietor expended on Inverinet £486, 5s. 11d. on buildings; £73, 18s. on lands; £137, 4s. 10d. enclosures; together £697, 8s. 9d. In 1851 the rent was £99, 8s. 6d.; in 1881 it was reduced by £17, and it is now £104, 5s., leaving only a total sum of £4, 17s. 6d. as the income of the proprietor on the £697 spent by him. I now come to Letterfearn, and the proprietor has given me permission to read part of the private report of this township sent to him. When he gave me charge of the estates in the end of February 1882, he instructed me to go over the whole of the west coast estates along with Mr Watson and visit the crofters, and see the native condition of every one of them. I got these instructions in April 1882, and in May Mr Watson and myself went over the estates, and spent about three weeks in visiting the different crofts and examining into the state of the people. I have here a copy of the report of the condition of the place which I sent to the proprietor, of which I shall read a part to show that I am not the enemy of the poor man any more than the proprietor is, and it was stated yesterday and to-day that there is no better friend of a poor man than he. I began my letter to Sir Alexander by saying:
—' As stated in my note of Saturday last, I beg leave to lay before you a report of my survey accompanied by Watson over your Lochalsh, Kintail, and Glenshiel estates. We desired the people to tell freely any complaints they had to make both relative to their possessions and to any disputes among themselves, that if the former were reasonable everything possible would be made to remove their cause, and in the latter amicable settlements would be endeavoured. Of this freedom of approach invited, I am happy to say not a shade of advantage was taken by them. They treated ourselves and our position most respectively.
—There are thirteen crofters paying from 30s. to £4, eight paying a few shillings for potato land, and eight squatters who have no lands. Their complaint was the small extent of land at their disposal for potato planting, and no outrun for grazing cows. The squatters can get potato land very seldom, only from the tenants of Drudaig and Leackachan, so that they are obliged to go to the neighbouring property for it. They complained also of being charged for sea-ware from Glass Island an amount of £ 4 , 5s. among all the crofters. It was shown to them how impossible it is to give them lands for grazing or more land for planting potatoes, as the whole is either under lease, or on the same footing as under lease, A few of them have a sufficiency of money to take middle-sized crofts, with savings from labour and fishing. Ruarach was offered among four of them, but they had not means enough to stock it, and Nonach and Blackwater among six ; these places are too far from the sea. Six of the squatters are able and active men with families, and it is a pity there is no place for them. They were all very civil, hoped something would bedone for them, and that the sea-ware money would be taken off their rents. No promises were made. The rent of Mr Macdonald, the tenant of Drudaig, was till Whitsunday last £130. Sir Alexander gave me instructions to try and do the best I could, and at the end of April last we were able to make arrangements for Mr Macdonald to give up the best portion of the farm for the crofters by reducing his rent to £70, and the portion set apart for the crofters contiguous to their land formerly occupied by them were valued at £15, at which sum the returns were made to the assessor this year, thus causing a decrease of £ 45 to the proprietor on the whole rent, consequent on the breaking up of this portion for the crofters. With reference to Camusluinie I am sorry to say that the delegates, although they told the truth, did not tell the whole truth. When Sir Alexander Matheson bought the property the rent was £ 143 ; they said £140.
Camusluinie.
—When Sir Alexander bought the property the rent of Camusluinie was £ 113 , payable by fifteen crofters. In 1852, so as to get the boundaries of the grazings adjusted, he took from them the sheiling of Frauchcorry, for which he made a reduction of £ 28 , making the rent £125, selecting eight of the sitting crofters as occupants, and providing for the rest elsewhere on the property. Between 1852 and
1859 he expended £ 960 in improvements upon the lands, and in 1860 he increased the rent to £160, equal to £ 3 , 13s. per cent, upon the outlay. This rent they paid without a grudge while the old managers lived, and till two years ago, when the present agitation commenced. With a view of satisfying them Sir Alexander, in December last, reduced their rent to £ 132 ; thus having only £7 of income for the £ 960 of outlay on their improvements. A few years ago he offered timber, lime, slates, and £ 20 to each of them who would build new houses. Of this offer only two took advantage, which cost the proprietor £100 each.
31631. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—You said, with reference to Bundaloch that there has been a reduction of rent from £271 to £219 at the present time ; who got the benefit of that arrangement ?
—The whole of them.
31632. How many small people and how many farms?
—I cannot say; it is only a year and a half since I came in ; and I do not know the names of the people.
31633. With regard to the Letterfearn tenants, you say Nonach, Blackwater, and Ruarach were offered them?
—Yes, and the cottars of Letterfearn.
31634. What size of farms are these?
—Ruarach is now let in one farm.
31635. And you offered it to how many cottars?
—Four.
31636. That would be £ 27 , 10s. a piece?
—Yes, there were only buildings for two, and there would have been large expenses for putting up two erections, which would have cost about £300 each.
31637. And how large are Nonach and Blackwater?
—They are now given to the people of Sallachy. The people of Letterfearn refused to take them, because they were so far away from the sea.
31638. There was a complaint by the Letterfearn people, I believe, that you had given them some extra grazing land at £15, which they say was only worth £7. You say yon have given a reduction of £50 to Mr Macdonald to get possession of that land?
—£60.
31639. For that land?
—That included the reduction to himself.
31640. His rent was £130 ?
—Yes.
31641. What reduction have you given him—20 or 30 per cent.?
—Twenty pounds of reduction over the whole.
31642. That would still leave this land worth £30 or £40?
—Yes.
31643. And it is not worth more than £7, the people say?
—They think they should get it for nothing.
31644. With regard to Camusluinie, they think the rent is too high, can you state that you could let it for a greater rent ?
—I know I could.
31645. Were you offered a higher rent?
—I was offered £150 by one man.
31646. A good man?
—Yes, but the proprietor would not give it to one man ; it is divided already amongst eight.
31647. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—You told us that in 1844 there were upon Bundaloch and Dornie these enormous arrears of £2170 ; bring the thing down to a few years later, and tell me what these were after Sir Alexander Matheson bought the property?
—It must have been all cancelled under the late Mr Lillingstone, for Sir Alexander got a clean sheet, and we have not got the old rent roll.
31648. No arrears were brought down?
—Not, so far as we were concerned.
31649. Would you be surprised if I told you that the arrears upon that place in 1851, when Sir Alexander Matheson got the property, were only £153 ?
—I know that too.
31650. Why didn’t you say it?
—The explanation of that is, that this was cancelled as the new arrears began.
31651. Professor Mackinnon.
—I have no doubt that if an account of these arrears is properly made out you would be able to tell how far back these arrears go ?
—This is the only document I could get.
31652. So that if the evidence is true that these £2000 of arrears were handed down from one proprietor to another, the arrears may not be so big as they look ?
—They cannot be that, because at the beginning of this century Dornie was laid out as a village.
31653. It was leased before that?
—Yes, I have here the rental of Dornie in 1830.
31654. Did you hear the statement of the man that the receipts were taken back from the people and a pass book given ; have you any evidence about that ?
—No, I never heard that before.
31655. But there is no evidence to show that it may not be true?
—I cannot say.
31656. I find in some accounts there are £70 of arrears on a rent of £3 ?
—That has been a case of the people paying no rent at all; that is quite a common thing.
31657. Is it a common thing?
—Not now, it is cancelled when it goes beyond a certain sum.
31658. So that the arrear might have been going back any length of time ?
—It could not have been going back very far, because it was in the beginning of this century that the place was made a village. In 1801 it came into the possession of Sir Hugh Innes, and in 1802 the village was made. I think a good many of the statements of the people were imaginary.
31659. But you have no evidence to the contrary?
—No.
31660. Are you quite prepared yourself to put a valuation of £40 upon the piece of ground which was given for £ 15 to the Letterfearn people ?
—It is not that I value the land itself at so much, as what it is worth to the whole farm; it is low ground, and on a Highland farm.
31661. As a valuator, what grazing valuation do you put upon that bit of ground ?
—The value to them is the value put on, and not the value to the farm.
31662. What is the value of the grazing in your opinion ?
—£15. There is some arable land which they may get divided into lots afterwards, and it is worth £ 1 an acre. The valuation of the others will be taken off the whole of the grazing, and some of the grazing may not be £10.
31663. We thought they were getting what you consider £ 50 worth of land for £15?
—Well, it can be explained. Mr Macdonald's farm was reduced from £ 130 to £70.
31664. But all the same the bit taken from him and given to these people is only worth £ 15 ?
—It is worth £ 15 to them as grazing and arable altogether.
31665. Would it be worth more to Mr Macdonald?
—Certainly, because a Highland farm is quite different from a low country farm.
31666. Would it be worth £ 10 to him ?
—1 cannot say.
31667. Can you not give the value to him as well as to them?
—No, I cannot; I would not like.
31668. If you consider that the value of this piece of ground to the crofters is £ 15 , surely acting for the proprietor does not interfere with your answering what would be the value to Mr Macdonald ?
—It would be worth £ 30 at least.
31669. As a matter of fact, although that would be worth only £ 30 to him, you have reduced his rent £ 60 ?
—Yes.
31670. Turning back to the general question of what you told us yesterday about the parish, and the management of the estate, I understood you were working gradually up to having a class of crofters of £ 10 and upwards all over ?
—Yes.
31671. And you wish to work gradually up to that, and you expect to be able to do it in course of time, in two ways —first by not taking any people from the outside into the property, and second by making new crofts ?
—Yes.
31672. And the other class of people you would have paying rents under £ 4 ?
—Yes, tradesmen, labourers, and fishermen.
31673. In which class would you put the Bundaloch people; in the £ 1 class ?
—Yes.
31674. Is there any opportunity for them to live as labourers or fishermen where they are ?
—Yes, as fishermen.
31675. Is Bundaloch a suitable place for fishermen?
—Quite suitable.
31676. Their own complaint is that it is far from the fishing ground, and the Rev. Mr Cameron corroborated that?
—Well, you pass by the castle which is at the lower end of the village, and the whole length of
the place is about three quarters of a mile.
31677. And the fishing ground would be this loch?
—It is as easy for them to come down the narrow stream to Bundaloch as from other parts; it is not so far.
31678. But you don't think they are such good fishermen as the people of Letterfearn ?
—I am not well acquainted with them. The Letterfearn people are clever fellows at fishing, and energetic, and they make a living at the fishing, and the Bundaloch people don't.
31679. Do you think they would be better farmers and crofters?
—They would be worse.
31680. They would require to be educated?
—They would.
31681. Certainly all the people about here look able strong-bodied men?
—They are; and they are very orderly too. We have none poor but squatters, and we have 123 people who pay no rent.
31682. You reduced the rent of the people of Kirkton from £30 to Roderick £24. Do you consider the rent they pay just now is quite moderate Maclean, enough ?
—Yes.
31683. It was rather excessive when it was £30?
—I don't hear them complain about the general reduction.
31684. Do you know their means well enough to be able to say they are quite comfortable ?
—I believe they are. There was one man who said he could not come forward, because he could scarcely get a shirt upon his back until he got a farm from Sir Alexander Matheson. He would not come forward with the other five.
31685. You stated that the amount of interest got from improvements was very low ?
—One and a half per cent.
31686. Might not these improvements have been rather extravagantly done ?
—I don't say that, but I say that they were very expensively done.
31687. Do you think the same result might have been brought about by a very much less expenditure of money ?
—Yes, by a thousand pounds less.
31688. And these other crofters you have all over the estate at £15 and upwards to £25, are in a fairly comfortable condition in an average year ?
—I believe so.
31689. And that is why you would like to work up all the crofts?
—Yes.
31690. There are four or five of the Camusluinie people who are not giving satisfaction ?
—They are old bachelors, and the reason of their going back is that they have no person to take an interest in them, and their tacks are going to the wall.
31691. Would you expect in future, when your plans will be more or less realised, that the great bulk of the population will consist of such people as these, rather than the people at £ 4 and under ?
—Certainly; because, in a short time there would not be much labour for the poorer classes.
31692. And also rather than people having large farms?
—Yes, Sir Alexander's wish is not to have large farms—not higher than £300 or £400 of rent.
31693. And these few in number?
—Yes.
31694. You wish to put the bulk of the people in crofts of from £15 upwards?
—From £15 to £50 for the bulk of the people. "
31695. And you are working up to that as fast as you can without removing any person from the estate?
—Yes, and Sir Alexander would not remove any of them.
31696. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—You mentioned that the Bundaloch people were removed because they would not pay rent ?
—Yes.
31697. You don't know what amount of arrears there was of rent?
—No.
31698. I daresay you heard of the petition which was presented to Sir Alexander by the people ?
—Yes.
31699. And your reply to it?-
—Yes.
31700. Your reply mentioned that you would consider whether you would send the petition on, and no further intimation seems to have been given whether you sent it on or not ?
—I told Mr M'Coll and some of the people that I would send it on; and Sir Alexander got the petition, and then it was that Sir Alexander sent me to inquire into the condition of the people, and the result of that inquiry I have mentioned, that one shepherd was leader in the matter. He wanted to disorganise the state of the property, and to break up the farm of his employer, and to get a part of it himself. He got other nineteen to follow him in his movement, one of whom I had great difficulty about, and at last I found that another person had adhibited his name. I have got the original of the petition here.
31701. I was merely asking whether you intimated to the people that the petition was presented to Sir Alexander Matheson.
—I told Mr M'Coll and some others.
31702. You have heard Mr Cameron, the priest of Dornie, state, in confirmation of Mr Morison, that the people were in abject poverty ?
—Yes; they are.
31703. Have you considered what can be done for them, if they are not in a position to take more land?
—I don't know.
31704. Did the people of Letterfearn ask you to provide them with a pier or harbour?
—No.
31705. Have they never spoken to you about that?
—I don't remember of them speaking about it.
31629. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—You wish to make some remarks upon the evidence which has been given to-day ?
—I do. ' With reference to Dornie and Bundaloch, in 1852 part of the graziugs was occupied by Duncan and John Macmillan at a rent of £60. In 1862, as no rent could be got from the stance-holders, the grazings some of them held were taken from them and addedto those held by the Macmillans, at an additional rent of £40, making the rent of Bundaloch £100, at which it is at present let on lease to John Macrae. When Sir Alexander came into possession of the estate in 1851, the rent of the whole arable and grazings of Dornie and Bundaloch was £271. It is now £219. In March last a petition was presented to Sir Alexander by twenty-one of the Bundaloch stance-holders for land. This he cannot give without breaking a lease. Inquiry has been made into the circumstances of the petitioners, which brought out that only one (the Bundaloch shepherd) could stock a lot, another partially, seventeen have no means, and two are in receipt of parochial relief. In 1844, previous to the potato disease, the arrears against the Dornie and Bundaloch crofters and stance-holders was £2170, 18s. 5d.'
31630. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—-Over 200 years ?
—-I don't know how long. All of them were in arrears except two. At Whitsunday 1852, the first year of Sir Alexander's possession, only eighteen paid in full, twenty partially, and eighty-six were in arrears amounting to £119, 14s. 5d. The statement was made that the arrears were handed down from one proprietor to another, but Sir Alexander Matheson began with a clean sheet. I met the people last spring and collected them into Dornie school, and endeavoured to give them a little knowledge of agriculture, because, I am sorry to say, they are bad farmers. Nobody taught the poor people, and I thought I would begin by giving them an elementary lesson, showing how the soil is formed by atmospheric action. I also told them that the earth-worm was a far better drainer than the Dornie people, and the man thought I was making an earth-worm of himself. I found it was a mistake to speak to them, for they could not follow me out; but the fault is that they are not taught. I hope there is no person more lenient than I am, and I would wish to see them educated. If they were educated they would be as able and as willing workers as any other people, but until they are taught we cannot expect so much of them as of those who are taught. With regard to the statements which have been
made about deer forests, I referred to them yesterday. The proprietor expended on Inverinet £486, 5s. 11d. on buildings; £73, 18s. on lands; £137, 4s. 10d. enclosures; together £697, 8s. 9d. In 1851 the rent was £99, 8s. 6d.; in 1881 it was reduced by £17, and it is now £104, 5s., leaving only a total sum of £4, 17s. 6d. as the income of the proprietor on the £697 spent by him. I now come to Letterfearn, and the proprietor has given me permission to read part of the private report of this township sent to him. When he gave me charge of the estates in the end of February 1882, he instructed me to go over the whole of the west coast estates along with Mr Watson and visit the crofters, and see the native condition of every one of them. I got these instructions in April 1882, and in May Mr Watson and myself went over the estates, and spent about three weeks in visiting the different crofts and examining into the state of the people. I have here a copy of the report of the condition of the place which I sent to the proprietor, of which I shall read a part to show that I am not the enemy of the poor man any more than the proprietor is, and it was stated yesterday and to-day that there is no better friend of a poor man than he. I began my letter to Sir Alexander by saying:
—' As stated in my note of Saturday last, I beg leave to lay before you a report of my survey accompanied by Watson over your Lochalsh, Kintail, and Glenshiel estates. We desired the people to tell freely any complaints they had to make both relative to their possessions and to any disputes among themselves, that if the former were reasonable everything possible would be made to remove their cause, and in the latter amicable settlements would be endeavoured. Of this freedom of approach invited, I am happy to say not a shade of advantage was taken by them. They treated ourselves and our position most respectively.
—There are thirteen crofters paying from 30s. to £4, eight paying a few shillings for potato land, and eight squatters who have no lands. Their complaint was the small extent of land at their disposal for potato planting, and no outrun for grazing cows. The squatters can get potato land very seldom, only from the tenants of Drudaig and Leackachan, so that they are obliged to go to the neighbouring property for it. They complained also of being charged for sea-ware from Glass Island an amount of £ 4 , 5s. among all the crofters. It was shown to them how impossible it is to give them lands for grazing or more land for planting potatoes, as the whole is either under lease, or on the same footing as under lease, A few of them have a sufficiency of money to take middle-sized crofts, with savings from labour and fishing. Ruarach was offered among four of them, but they had not means enough to stock it, and Nonach and Blackwater among six ; these places are too far from the sea. Six of the squatters are able and active men with families, and it is a pity there is no place for them. They were all very civil, hoped something would bedone for them, and that the sea-ware money would be taken off their rents. No promises were made. The rent of Mr Macdonald, the tenant of Drudaig, was till Whitsunday last £130. Sir Alexander gave me instructions to try and do the best I could, and at the end of April last we were able to make arrangements for Mr Macdonald to give up the best portion of the farm for the crofters by reducing his rent to £70, and the portion set apart for the crofters contiguous to their land formerly occupied by them were valued at £15, at which sum the returns were made to the assessor this year, thus causing a decrease of £ 45 to the proprietor on the whole rent, consequent on the breaking up of this portion for the crofters. With reference to Camusluinie I am sorry to say that the delegates, although they told the truth, did not tell the whole truth. When Sir Alexander Matheson bought the property the rent was £ 143 ; they said £140.
Camusluinie.
—When Sir Alexander bought the property the rent of Camusluinie was £ 113 , payable by fifteen crofters. In 1852, so as to get the boundaries of the grazings adjusted, he took from them the sheiling of Frauchcorry, for which he made a reduction of £ 28 , making the rent £125, selecting eight of the sitting crofters as occupants, and providing for the rest elsewhere on the property. Between 1852 and
1859 he expended £ 960 in improvements upon the lands, and in 1860 he increased the rent to £160, equal to £ 3 , 13s. per cent, upon the outlay. This rent they paid without a grudge while the old managers lived, and till two years ago, when the present agitation commenced. With a view of satisfying them Sir Alexander, in December last, reduced their rent to £ 132 ; thus having only £7 of income for the £ 960 of outlay on their improvements. A few years ago he offered timber, lime, slates, and £ 20 to each of them who would build new houses. Of this offer only two took advantage, which cost the proprietor £100 each.
31631. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—You said, with reference to Bundaloch that there has been a reduction of rent from £271 to £219 at the present time ; who got the benefit of that arrangement ?
—The whole of them.
31632. How many small people and how many farms?
—I cannot say; it is only a year and a half since I came in ; and I do not know the names of the people.
31633. With regard to the Letterfearn tenants, you say Nonach, Blackwater, and Ruarach were offered them?
—Yes, and the cottars of Letterfearn.
31634. What size of farms are these?
—Ruarach is now let in one farm.
31635. And you offered it to how many cottars?
—Four.
31636. That would be £ 27 , 10s. a piece?
—Yes, there were only buildings for two, and there would have been large expenses for putting up two erections, which would have cost about £300 each.
31637. And how large are Nonach and Blackwater?
—They are now given to the people of Sallachy. The people of Letterfearn refused to take them, because they were so far away from the sea.
31638. There was a complaint by the Letterfearn people, I believe, that you had given them some extra grazing land at £15, which they say was only worth £7. You say yon have given a reduction of £50 to Mr Macdonald to get possession of that land?
—£60.
31639. For that land?
—That included the reduction to himself.
31640. His rent was £130 ?
—Yes.
31641. What reduction have you given him—20 or 30 per cent.?
—Twenty pounds of reduction over the whole.
31642. That would still leave this land worth £30 or £40?
—Yes.
31643. And it is not worth more than £7, the people say?
—They think they should get it for nothing.
31644. With regard to Camusluinie, they think the rent is too high, can you state that you could let it for a greater rent ?
—I know I could.
31645. Were you offered a higher rent?
—I was offered £150 by one man.
31646. A good man?
—Yes, but the proprietor would not give it to one man ; it is divided already amongst eight.
31647. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—You told us that in 1844 there were upon Bundaloch and Dornie these enormous arrears of £2170 ; bring the thing down to a few years later, and tell me what these were after Sir Alexander Matheson bought the property?
—It must have been all cancelled under the late Mr Lillingstone, for Sir Alexander got a clean sheet, and we have not got the old rent roll.
31648. No arrears were brought down?
—Not, so far as we were concerned.
31649. Would you be surprised if I told you that the arrears upon that place in 1851, when Sir Alexander Matheson got the property, were only £153 ?
—I know that too.
31650. Why didn’t you say it?
—The explanation of that is, that this was cancelled as the new arrears began.
31651. Professor Mackinnon.
—I have no doubt that if an account of these arrears is properly made out you would be able to tell how far back these arrears go ?
—This is the only document I could get.
31652. So that if the evidence is true that these £2000 of arrears were handed down from one proprietor to another, the arrears may not be so big as they look ?
—They cannot be that, because at the beginning of this century Dornie was laid out as a village.
31653. It was leased before that?
—Yes, I have here the rental of Dornie in 1830.
31654. Did you hear the statement of the man that the receipts were taken back from the people and a pass book given ; have you any evidence about that ?
—No, I never heard that before.
31655. But there is no evidence to show that it may not be true?
—I cannot say.
31656. I find in some accounts there are £70 of arrears on a rent of £3 ?
—That has been a case of the people paying no rent at all; that is quite a common thing.
31657. Is it a common thing?
—Not now, it is cancelled when it goes beyond a certain sum.
31658. So that the arrear might have been going back any length of time ?
—It could not have been going back very far, because it was in the beginning of this century that the place was made a village. In 1801 it came into the possession of Sir Hugh Innes, and in 1802 the village was made. I think a good many of the statements of the people were imaginary.
31659. But you have no evidence to the contrary?
—No.
31660. Are you quite prepared yourself to put a valuation of £40 upon the piece of ground which was given for £ 15 to the Letterfearn people ?
—It is not that I value the land itself at so much, as what it is worth to the whole farm; it is low ground, and on a Highland farm.
31661. As a valuator, what grazing valuation do you put upon that bit of ground ?
—The value to them is the value put on, and not the value to the farm.
31662. What is the value of the grazing in your opinion ?
—£15. There is some arable land which they may get divided into lots afterwards, and it is worth £ 1 an acre. The valuation of the others will be taken off the whole of the grazing, and some of the grazing may not be £10.
31663. We thought they were getting what you consider £ 50 worth of land for £15?
—Well, it can be explained. Mr Macdonald's farm was reduced from £ 130 to £70.
31664. But all the same the bit taken from him and given to these people is only worth £ 15 ?
—It is worth £ 15 to them as grazing and arable altogether.
31665. Would it be worth more to Mr Macdonald?
—Certainly, because a Highland farm is quite different from a low country farm.
31666. Would it be worth £ 10 to him ?
—1 cannot say.
31667. Can you not give the value to him as well as to them?
—No, I cannot; I would not like.
31668. If you consider that the value of this piece of ground to the crofters is £ 15 , surely acting for the proprietor does not interfere with your answering what would be the value to Mr Macdonald ?
—It would be worth £ 30 at least.
31669. As a matter of fact, although that would be worth only £ 30 to him, you have reduced his rent £ 60 ?
—Yes.
31670. Turning back to the general question of what you told us yesterday about the parish, and the management of the estate, I understood you were working gradually up to having a class of crofters of £ 10 and upwards all over ?
—Yes.
31671. And you wish to work gradually up to that, and you expect to be able to do it in course of time, in two ways —first by not taking any people from the outside into the property, and second by making new crofts ?
—Yes.
31672. And the other class of people you would have paying rents under £ 4 ?
—Yes, tradesmen, labourers, and fishermen.
31673. In which class would you put the Bundaloch people; in the £ 1 class ?
—Yes.
31674. Is there any opportunity for them to live as labourers or fishermen where they are ?
—Yes, as fishermen.
31675. Is Bundaloch a suitable place for fishermen?
—Quite suitable.
31676. Their own complaint is that it is far from the fishing ground, and the Rev. Mr Cameron corroborated that?
—Well, you pass by the castle which is at the lower end of the village, and the whole length of
the place is about three quarters of a mile.
31677. And the fishing ground would be this loch?
—It is as easy for them to come down the narrow stream to Bundaloch as from other parts; it is not so far.
31678. But you don't think they are such good fishermen as the people of Letterfearn ?
—I am not well acquainted with them. The Letterfearn people are clever fellows at fishing, and energetic, and they make a living at the fishing, and the Bundaloch people don't.
31679. Do you think they would be better farmers and crofters?
—They would be worse.
31680. They would require to be educated?
—They would.
31681. Certainly all the people about here look able strong-bodied men?
—They are; and they are very orderly too. We have none poor but squatters, and we have 123 people who pay no rent.
31682. You reduced the rent of the people of Kirkton from £30 to Roderick £24. Do you consider the rent they pay just now is quite moderate Maclean, enough ?
—Yes.
31683. It was rather excessive when it was £30?
—I don't hear them complain about the general reduction.
31684. Do you know their means well enough to be able to say they are quite comfortable ?
—I believe they are. There was one man who said he could not come forward, because he could scarcely get a shirt upon his back until he got a farm from Sir Alexander Matheson. He would not come forward with the other five.
31685. You stated that the amount of interest got from improvements was very low ?
—One and a half per cent.
31686. Might not these improvements have been rather extravagantly done ?
—I don't say that, but I say that they were very expensively done.
31687. Do you think the same result might have been brought about by a very much less expenditure of money ?
—Yes, by a thousand pounds less.
31688. And these other crofters you have all over the estate at £15 and upwards to £25, are in a fairly comfortable condition in an average year ?
—I believe so.
31689. And that is why you would like to work up all the crofts?
—Yes.
31690. There are four or five of the Camusluinie people who are not giving satisfaction ?
—They are old bachelors, and the reason of their going back is that they have no person to take an interest in them, and their tacks are going to the wall.
31691. Would you expect in future, when your plans will be more or less realised, that the great bulk of the population will consist of such people as these, rather than the people at £ 4 and under ?
—Certainly; because, in a short time there would not be much labour for the poorer classes.
31692. And also rather than people having large farms?
—Yes, Sir Alexander's wish is not to have large farms—not higher than £300 or £400 of rent.
31693. And these few in number?
—Yes.
31694. You wish to put the bulk of the people in crofts of from £15 upwards?
—From £15 to £50 for the bulk of the people. "
31695. And you are working up to that as fast as you can without removing any person from the estate?
—Yes, and Sir Alexander would not remove any of them.
31696. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—You mentioned that the Bundaloch people were removed because they would not pay rent ?
—Yes.
31697. You don't know what amount of arrears there was of rent?
—No.
31698. I daresay you heard of the petition which was presented to Sir Alexander by the people ?
—Yes.
31699. And your reply to it?-
—Yes.
31700. Your reply mentioned that you would consider whether you would send the petition on, and no further intimation seems to have been given whether you sent it on or not ?
—I told Mr M'Coll and some of the people that I would send it on; and Sir Alexander got the petition, and then it was that Sir Alexander sent me to inquire into the condition of the people, and the result of that inquiry I have mentioned, that one shepherd was leader in the matter. He wanted to disorganise the state of the property, and to break up the farm of his employer, and to get a part of it himself. He got other nineteen to follow him in his movement, one of whom I had great difficulty about, and at last I found that another person had adhibited his name. I have got the original of the petition here.
31701. I was merely asking whether you intimated to the people that the petition was presented to Sir Alexander Matheson.
—I told Mr M'Coll and some others.
31702. You have heard Mr Cameron, the priest of Dornie, state, in confirmation of Mr Morison, that the people were in abject poverty ?
—Yes; they are.
31703. Have you considered what can be done for them, if they are not in a position to take more land?
—I don't know.
31704. Did the people of Letterfearn ask you to provide them with a pier or harbour?
—No.
31705. Have they never spoken to you about that?
—I don't remember of them speaking about it.
Letterfearn, 3 August 1883 - Rev John Cameron
Rev. JOHN CAMERON, Roman Catholic Priest, Dornie (41)—examined.
31584. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—How long have you been in Dornie?
—Ten years.
31585. Have you any general statement to make?
—Not particularly.
31586. Y'ou heard what Mr Morison said ?
—I did. With regard to the general management of the estate, I can confirm what Mr Morison said. I believe that the proprietor means well to all, but as regards the people of Bundaloch really the poverty is very great. I am living in the immediate neighbourhood of that place, and I suppose I can see how they are getting on better than any other person in the parish, and I don't know how they can manage to live at all.
31587. Why should the people of Bundaloch be worse off than those at Letterfearn ?
—They are really worse.
31588. What is the reason ?
—I believe the Letterfearn people are better fishermen than the Bundaloch people, and they are nearer to the fishing ground.
31589. Is Bundaloch far from Letterfearn?
—No, about half a mile.
31590. Is there difficulty in taking the boats up?
—There is a strong current passing Dornie, and if the current is not going with them it is very hard to work against it. I may also say that, as far as the proprietor is concerned with us Roman Catholics in the district, we have always experienced from him perfect impartiality of treatment. He gives no favours. We have no more trouble than any one else, and no one is afraid on account of his religion of being disturbed by the proprietor or the factor.
31591. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Do you know anything of the ancient history of Bundaloch ?
—I cannot say that I do.
31592. Are you aware that a number of people were crowded upon the neighbourhood?
—Yes, I believe they were a long time back.
31593. And have they been struggling ever since?
—Yes.
31594. May I ask how many people belong to your church?
—I suppose in Kintail and Lochalsh district nearly eighty persons.
31595. How many souls?
—Over 140; but they are so scattered that many a time I may not have forty in the church.
31596. Are these all old Catholics ?
—Old Catholics of the district. Formerly the congregation was much larger, but gradually, by emigration and other causes, they have left the district.
31597. Were a number of the Macraes who used to inhabit the glens not Roman Catholics ?
—Some of them were; at one time there were a good number of the Macraes Catholics.
31598. Have you any privileges yourself ? Have you any land from the proprietor in connection with your residence ?
—I have no land, and I really want no land.
31599. There is nothing attached to your office there ?
—No.
31600. Are your people growing or rather the opposite?
—I cannot say they are; they are rather decreasing, and the population of the district is decreasing at the same time.
31601. Are there any Catholics, are you aware, further north and west, upon the west coast within Lochalsh?
—No, unless perhaps an Irish hawker may settle down.
31602. Were there ever any Roman Catholics in Glenelg?
—Before the Reformation, I believe there were.
31603. No doubt, but my question specially refers to this, that there are some in your district, and that you must jump over Glenelg to Arisaig and Morar before you come to any others ?
—Yes.
31604. Can you explain why there are none in Glenelg in recent times?
—I believe it depended most on the proprietors ; if the laird was Protestant the people were Protestant, and if the laird was Catholic the people Catholic.
31605. Have you ever heard it stated that the Macleods, who were once proprietors of Glenelg, discouraged Roman Catholics especially?
—I never did.
31606. But there are none at this moment in Glenelg, properly speaking
—No, not of the natives.
31607. Professor Mackinnon.
—Where were you born and brought up yourself, Mr Cameron?
—On Lord Lovat's estate.
31608. Comparing that country with this, what would you say of the condition of the people ?
—I believe they are far better off where I was rìght up than they are here. On Lord Lovat's estate the farms and crofts are so divided that the crofters can get a great deal of work by labouring on the farms.
31609. There is a regular gradation?
—There is, and there are also forests in which the people are employed.
31610. I suppose there is more good arable land there?
—-Yes, it is all arable land, very little grazing.
31611. With regard to the education of the people hereabout, has it been improving during the last ten years ?
—Rapidly.
31612. Are the children of your communion educated in the boardschool?
—No, there is a school attached to our communion.
31613. But others find their way to the board schools ?
—Yes.
31614. Under the conscience clause ?
—Yes. .
31615. Are you a member of the School Board?
—No.
31616. But I suppose you are quite satisfied with the administration of the Board ?
—Certainly, as far as the paupers in the district are concerned. I can say there is no distinction made in the way of religion.
31617. In the School Board or Poor Board or anywhere else?
—So far as I know. I don't know about the School Board ; but we are not troubled.
31618. Is the school that educates your own people under inspection?
—Yes.
31619. And is regularly examined the same as the other schools in the district ?
—Yes.
31620. And is efficiently taught?
—Yes.
31621. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Have you anything more to state?
—Nothing except the poverty of Bundaloch. I was sent as a delegate for them, and if anything can be done for them it will be a great boon. They will never improve as they are, because they can't.
31622. You think they cannot take to fishing like their neighbours?
—They do fish, but they are not so successful fishermen as the Letterfearn men ; and the fishing is a very precarious occupation. In many ways they would not earn what they would earn in the same time by days' wages.
31623. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Before you signed the petition which has been referred to were you thoroughly satisfied that the statements in it were well founded ?
—Well, we heard the people making these statements, and we had no reason to suppose they were not true.
31624. And as far as your personal knowledge goes, they were true?
—Many of the statements refer to events before my time.
31625. But with regard to the present condition?
—It is perfectly true.
31626. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—You never got any acknowledgment of that letter ?
—No, no acknowledgment at all.
31627. Did you ever speak to the factor about it?
—I don't think I have met him since.
31628. Or Sir Alexander Matheson either?
—No.
31584. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—How long have you been in Dornie?
—Ten years.
31585. Have you any general statement to make?
—Not particularly.
31586. Y'ou heard what Mr Morison said ?
—I did. With regard to the general management of the estate, I can confirm what Mr Morison said. I believe that the proprietor means well to all, but as regards the people of Bundaloch really the poverty is very great. I am living in the immediate neighbourhood of that place, and I suppose I can see how they are getting on better than any other person in the parish, and I don't know how they can manage to live at all.
31587. Why should the people of Bundaloch be worse off than those at Letterfearn ?
—They are really worse.
31588. What is the reason ?
—I believe the Letterfearn people are better fishermen than the Bundaloch people, and they are nearer to the fishing ground.
31589. Is Bundaloch far from Letterfearn?
—No, about half a mile.
31590. Is there difficulty in taking the boats up?
—There is a strong current passing Dornie, and if the current is not going with them it is very hard to work against it. I may also say that, as far as the proprietor is concerned with us Roman Catholics in the district, we have always experienced from him perfect impartiality of treatment. He gives no favours. We have no more trouble than any one else, and no one is afraid on account of his religion of being disturbed by the proprietor or the factor.
31591. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Do you know anything of the ancient history of Bundaloch ?
—I cannot say that I do.
31592. Are you aware that a number of people were crowded upon the neighbourhood?
—Yes, I believe they were a long time back.
31593. And have they been struggling ever since?
—Yes.
31594. May I ask how many people belong to your church?
—I suppose in Kintail and Lochalsh district nearly eighty persons.
31595. How many souls?
—Over 140; but they are so scattered that many a time I may not have forty in the church.
31596. Are these all old Catholics ?
—Old Catholics of the district. Formerly the congregation was much larger, but gradually, by emigration and other causes, they have left the district.
31597. Were a number of the Macraes who used to inhabit the glens not Roman Catholics ?
—Some of them were; at one time there were a good number of the Macraes Catholics.
31598. Have you any privileges yourself ? Have you any land from the proprietor in connection with your residence ?
—I have no land, and I really want no land.
31599. There is nothing attached to your office there ?
—No.
31600. Are your people growing or rather the opposite?
—I cannot say they are; they are rather decreasing, and the population of the district is decreasing at the same time.
31601. Are there any Catholics, are you aware, further north and west, upon the west coast within Lochalsh?
—No, unless perhaps an Irish hawker may settle down.
31602. Were there ever any Roman Catholics in Glenelg?
—Before the Reformation, I believe there were.
31603. No doubt, but my question specially refers to this, that there are some in your district, and that you must jump over Glenelg to Arisaig and Morar before you come to any others ?
—Yes.
31604. Can you explain why there are none in Glenelg in recent times?
—I believe it depended most on the proprietors ; if the laird was Protestant the people were Protestant, and if the laird was Catholic the people Catholic.
31605. Have you ever heard it stated that the Macleods, who were once proprietors of Glenelg, discouraged Roman Catholics especially?
—I never did.
31606. But there are none at this moment in Glenelg, properly speaking
—No, not of the natives.
31607. Professor Mackinnon.
—Where were you born and brought up yourself, Mr Cameron?
—On Lord Lovat's estate.
31608. Comparing that country with this, what would you say of the condition of the people ?
—I believe they are far better off where I was rìght up than they are here. On Lord Lovat's estate the farms and crofts are so divided that the crofters can get a great deal of work by labouring on the farms.
31609. There is a regular gradation?
—There is, and there are also forests in which the people are employed.
31610. I suppose there is more good arable land there?
—-Yes, it is all arable land, very little grazing.
31611. With regard to the education of the people hereabout, has it been improving during the last ten years ?
—Rapidly.
31612. Are the children of your communion educated in the boardschool?
—No, there is a school attached to our communion.
31613. But others find their way to the board schools ?
—Yes.
31614. Under the conscience clause ?
—Yes. .
31615. Are you a member of the School Board?
—No.
31616. But I suppose you are quite satisfied with the administration of the Board ?
—Certainly, as far as the paupers in the district are concerned. I can say there is no distinction made in the way of religion.
31617. In the School Board or Poor Board or anywhere else?
—So far as I know. I don't know about the School Board ; but we are not troubled.
31618. Is the school that educates your own people under inspection?
—Yes.
31619. And is regularly examined the same as the other schools in the district ?
—Yes.
31620. And is efficiently taught?
—Yes.
31621. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Have you anything more to state?
—Nothing except the poverty of Bundaloch. I was sent as a delegate for them, and if anything can be done for them it will be a great boon. They will never improve as they are, because they can't.
31622. You think they cannot take to fishing like their neighbours?
—They do fish, but they are not so successful fishermen as the Letterfearn men ; and the fishing is a very precarious occupation. In many ways they would not earn what they would earn in the same time by days' wages.
31623. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Before you signed the petition which has been referred to were you thoroughly satisfied that the statements in it were well founded ?
—Well, we heard the people making these statements, and we had no reason to suppose they were not true.
31624. And as far as your personal knowledge goes, they were true?
—Many of the statements refer to events before my time.
31625. But with regard to the present condition?
—It is perfectly true.
31626. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—You never got any acknowledgment of that letter ?
—No, no acknowledgment at all.
31627. Did you ever speak to the factor about it?
—I don't think I have met him since.
31628. Or Sir Alexander Matheson either?
—No.
Letterfearn, 3 August 1883 - Christopher Macrae & David Macrae
CHRISTOPHER MACRAE, Crofter (54), assisted by DAVID MACRAE, Crofter (37), Camusluinie
—examined.
31561. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
— Have you any statement to make ?
— We have.
To the Royal Commissioners, Highlands and Islands,
—We the undersigned, on behalf of the tenants of Camusluinie, the property of Sir Alexander Matheson, Bart., Lochalsh, humbly beg to submit the following statement, which is a true representation of our grievances :
—When Sir Alexander Matheson bought the property in 1851 our rent was £140. The glen of Frauchcorry was then taken from us. In this glen we used to summer our horses, young cattle, and sheep for five months in one year. We consider this our greatest grievance, as in consequence of having been deprived of this glen we had to sell most of our stock, as we had no place to keep them and no means of supporting them. We got a reduction in the rent of only £15 for the loss of this glen. In 1860 our rent was raised from £120 to £160, because of some ìmprovements which the proprietor began to make on our land, and at the same time two large pieces of land were taken from us for plantations. The improvements promised when our rent was raised to £160 have not been completed yet. In 1882 we sent a petition to our proprietor, stating that it was impossible for us any longer to pay the rent charged, and requested him to reduce the rent to £120, and make the improvements promised. The rent was then reduced to £132, on condition that we would pay up all arrears. We consider this rent too high; it would be easier for us to pay a rent of £140, if we had Frauchcorry, than £100 without it, under present circumstances. We also got notice from the factor by letter and by telegram that other parties were wanting Camusluinie, and we were asked to send an immediate reply, as he could not " be hanging on in this way for us, keeping other people in suspense." Our land lies very low at the foot of high bills, and the heavy rains in winter carry away the substance of the soil into the river Elchaig in front, and the river when flooded carries off even the soil itself. There is no bridge across this river, which is very broad, and there is no way by which we can go from Camusluinie with a cart except by crossing this river. We consider, when we pay road money, we should have a road across the river, and we would be most willing to assist in the construction of a bridge, if materials were provided for it. The want of a bridge is also a great disadvantage in regard to the children attending school, as m the winter time the river is often impassable for days. We earnestly trust that the Royal Commission will consider our case favourably, and do for us what is just and reasonable.
—DAVID MACRAE, CHRISTOPHER MACRAE, delegates.'
31562. Who got the glen which was taken from you?
—I t was added to Lienessie.
31563. Was Lienessie so small before that it required this glen?
—They had more for the one man than we had all between us.
31564. How many heads of families are there altogether in Camusluinie ?
—Eighty to-day.
31565. Are there any cottars or squatters on the ground ?
—One family.
31566. Did you ever ask the proprietor to do something in the way of putting a bridge across the river?
—We were always in the habit of speaking to the factor about the matter, but got no encouragement to expect that it would be done.
31567. Is there any convenient place for a bridge there; are there any rocks ?
—I think there are at the end of the present road.
31568. Would a wooden bridge be sufficient for your present purposes?
—I think it would.
31569. You complain that certain improvements were promised to you when the rent was raised to £ 1 60; what were the improvements which were promised ? There were drains to be made round about some of it, in order that it might be trenched and brought under cultivation, which was never done.
31570. Was any reason assigned for it not being done?
—No reasons were given, so far as I know.
31571. You say you would be willing to contribute towards the erection of the bridge—in what form
—in the way of carting or giving labour?
—We mean that we would help with our horses to cart materials to it.
31572. Your rent now is £132, but you still think it is too dear?
—Yes, we do.
31573. If you got the rent reduced to £120 and got a bridge, you would be so far satisfied?
—In addition to that, we would like the improvements to be finished before we would be in a fair position to pay even that rent.
31574. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Is Frauchorry attached to the farm, or is it a shieling in the hill ?
—It was detached.
31575. How far is it from you?
—I think about ten miles.
31576. Are there any farms in the county that retain these detached portions which were common in old times?
—I am not aware of any.
31577. Professor Mackinnon (to Christopher Macrae)
—I suppose you agree with everything your neighbour has said ?
—Yes.
31578. You have nothing particular to add to what is in the paper and to what he said ?
—Some of us have very bad houses; they are getting old like ourselves.
31579. Don't you get encouragement to build new houses if you wish?
—The factor holds out from time to time that we would get this, but he has not come near us for some time back. When he came to see us about a year ago, he was willing to promise anything we wanted.
315S0. You don't know, of any one in the place, who wanted to build a house and was refused the usual assistance which is given on the estate ?
—They built two or three houses in the township on that system.
31581. You have therefore no cause to complain against the factor about the houses more than against yourselves ?
—No, but it is delaying too long from time to time.
31582. Are you not delaying too long to ask him ?
—I live too far away, and never see the factor except at the rent time, unless he comes to see me.
31583. But does not the factor live just as far away from you?
—The factor was promising he would come and see me, and he has not come.
—examined.
31561. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
— Have you any statement to make ?
— We have.
To the Royal Commissioners, Highlands and Islands,
—We the undersigned, on behalf of the tenants of Camusluinie, the property of Sir Alexander Matheson, Bart., Lochalsh, humbly beg to submit the following statement, which is a true representation of our grievances :
—When Sir Alexander Matheson bought the property in 1851 our rent was £140. The glen of Frauchcorry was then taken from us. In this glen we used to summer our horses, young cattle, and sheep for five months in one year. We consider this our greatest grievance, as in consequence of having been deprived of this glen we had to sell most of our stock, as we had no place to keep them and no means of supporting them. We got a reduction in the rent of only £15 for the loss of this glen. In 1860 our rent was raised from £120 to £160, because of some ìmprovements which the proprietor began to make on our land, and at the same time two large pieces of land were taken from us for plantations. The improvements promised when our rent was raised to £160 have not been completed yet. In 1882 we sent a petition to our proprietor, stating that it was impossible for us any longer to pay the rent charged, and requested him to reduce the rent to £120, and make the improvements promised. The rent was then reduced to £132, on condition that we would pay up all arrears. We consider this rent too high; it would be easier for us to pay a rent of £140, if we had Frauchcorry, than £100 without it, under present circumstances. We also got notice from the factor by letter and by telegram that other parties were wanting Camusluinie, and we were asked to send an immediate reply, as he could not " be hanging on in this way for us, keeping other people in suspense." Our land lies very low at the foot of high bills, and the heavy rains in winter carry away the substance of the soil into the river Elchaig in front, and the river when flooded carries off even the soil itself. There is no bridge across this river, which is very broad, and there is no way by which we can go from Camusluinie with a cart except by crossing this river. We consider, when we pay road money, we should have a road across the river, and we would be most willing to assist in the construction of a bridge, if materials were provided for it. The want of a bridge is also a great disadvantage in regard to the children attending school, as m the winter time the river is often impassable for days. We earnestly trust that the Royal Commission will consider our case favourably, and do for us what is just and reasonable.
—DAVID MACRAE, CHRISTOPHER MACRAE, delegates.'
31562. Who got the glen which was taken from you?
—I t was added to Lienessie.
31563. Was Lienessie so small before that it required this glen?
—They had more for the one man than we had all between us.
31564. How many heads of families are there altogether in Camusluinie ?
—Eighty to-day.
31565. Are there any cottars or squatters on the ground ?
—One family.
31566. Did you ever ask the proprietor to do something in the way of putting a bridge across the river?
—We were always in the habit of speaking to the factor about the matter, but got no encouragement to expect that it would be done.
31567. Is there any convenient place for a bridge there; are there any rocks ?
—I think there are at the end of the present road.
31568. Would a wooden bridge be sufficient for your present purposes?
—I think it would.
31569. You complain that certain improvements were promised to you when the rent was raised to £ 1 60; what were the improvements which were promised ? There were drains to be made round about some of it, in order that it might be trenched and brought under cultivation, which was never done.
31570. Was any reason assigned for it not being done?
—No reasons were given, so far as I know.
31571. You say you would be willing to contribute towards the erection of the bridge—in what form
—in the way of carting or giving labour?
—We mean that we would help with our horses to cart materials to it.
31572. Your rent now is £132, but you still think it is too dear?
—Yes, we do.
31573. If you got the rent reduced to £120 and got a bridge, you would be so far satisfied?
—In addition to that, we would like the improvements to be finished before we would be in a fair position to pay even that rent.
31574. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Is Frauchorry attached to the farm, or is it a shieling in the hill ?
—It was detached.
31575. How far is it from you?
—I think about ten miles.
31576. Are there any farms in the county that retain these detached portions which were common in old times?
—I am not aware of any.
31577. Professor Mackinnon (to Christopher Macrae)
—I suppose you agree with everything your neighbour has said ?
—Yes.
31578. You have nothing particular to add to what is in the paper and to what he said ?
—Some of us have very bad houses; they are getting old like ourselves.
31579. Don't you get encouragement to build new houses if you wish?
—The factor holds out from time to time that we would get this, but he has not come near us for some time back. When he came to see us about a year ago, he was willing to promise anything we wanted.
315S0. You don't know, of any one in the place, who wanted to build a house and was refused the usual assistance which is given on the estate ?
—They built two or three houses in the township on that system.
31581. You have therefore no cause to complain against the factor about the houses more than against yourselves ?
—No, but it is delaying too long from time to time.
31582. Are you not delaying too long to ask him ?
—I live too far away, and never see the factor except at the rent time, unless he comes to see me.
31583. But does not the factor live just as far away from you?
—The factor was promising he would come and see me, and he has not come.
Letterfearn, 3 August 1883 - Alexander Macrae (Letterfearn)
ALEXANDER MACRAE, Cottar and Fisherman, Letterfearn—examined.
31533. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Are you a crofter?
—I have an acre of land.
31534. Are you a delegate ?
—Yes.
31535. Who are those who sent you here?
—All the township.
31536. The same as sent William Grant and Alexander Maclennan?
—Yes.
31537. Have you anything more to say than they had?
—Not very much.
31538. Do you concur with all they said ?
—Yes.
31539. What is it they complain mostly about?
—Poverty and want of land.
31540. What you ask for is more land ?
—Land ! land !
31541. How much land ?
—Eight acres; and we want four cows and a horse and from forty to fifty sheep.
31542. Would you be able to stock a piece of ground of that size ?
—I would try it.
31543. Is the fishing good here ?
—One year it is and another it is not.
31544. Taking one farm with another, would they all be able to do as you would do ?
—I think the greater part of them would.
31545. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Where would you all get the land?
—The glens on each side of us.
31546. Professor Mackinnon.
—This loch was famous for fishing in the old times, was it not ?
—Yes, but it is falling off now.
31547. Is that because the silver-herring has been lost?
—I don't know.
31548. Which would the people prefer to get back, the land or the silver-herring ?
—They would prefer the land.
31549. They have more faith in the land than in the herring ?
—Herring are uncertain, but the land is sure if we had it.
31550. Sheriff Nicolson:
—Have you been fishing yourself this season?
—Yes.
31551. Where?
—In Loch Duich.
31552. Has the fishing been good?
—There has not been anything yet.
31553. What is the greatest number of crans you have got?
—Four barrels that other two and I have got this season yet.
31554. Among three of you ?
—Yes.
31555. What did you get for that?
—We sent them by steamer to Glasgow, and we don't know yet what price they will be.
31556. The best fishing here begins later, does it not?
—One season it will be and another not.
31557. Have any of the other boats here done any better than you this season ?
—Yes, some of them have got their ten and twelve barrels —those who have fished best.
31558. If you had bigger boats would you go and try the fishing at Barra and Stornoway ?
—Yes, if we had them we would try it, of course.
31559. But there is no boat here big enough to do that?
—There is one boat ; the people brought her from the south two years ago.
31560. Has it been at Stornoway or the east coast this season?
—Not this summer.
31533. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Are you a crofter?
—I have an acre of land.
31534. Are you a delegate ?
—Yes.
31535. Who are those who sent you here?
—All the township.
31536. The same as sent William Grant and Alexander Maclennan?
—Yes.
31537. Have you anything more to say than they had?
—Not very much.
31538. Do you concur with all they said ?
—Yes.
31539. What is it they complain mostly about?
—Poverty and want of land.
31540. What you ask for is more land ?
—Land ! land !
31541. How much land ?
—Eight acres; and we want four cows and a horse and from forty to fifty sheep.
31542. Would you be able to stock a piece of ground of that size ?
—I would try it.
31543. Is the fishing good here ?
—One year it is and another it is not.
31544. Taking one farm with another, would they all be able to do as you would do ?
—I think the greater part of them would.
31545. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Where would you all get the land?
—The glens on each side of us.
31546. Professor Mackinnon.
—This loch was famous for fishing in the old times, was it not ?
—Yes, but it is falling off now.
31547. Is that because the silver-herring has been lost?
—I don't know.
31548. Which would the people prefer to get back, the land or the silver-herring ?
—They would prefer the land.
31549. They have more faith in the land than in the herring ?
—Herring are uncertain, but the land is sure if we had it.
31550. Sheriff Nicolson:
—Have you been fishing yourself this season?
—Yes.
31551. Where?
—In Loch Duich.
31552. Has the fishing been good?
—There has not been anything yet.
31553. What is the greatest number of crans you have got?
—Four barrels that other two and I have got this season yet.
31554. Among three of you ?
—Yes.
31555. What did you get for that?
—We sent them by steamer to Glasgow, and we don't know yet what price they will be.
31556. The best fishing here begins later, does it not?
—One season it will be and another not.
31557. Have any of the other boats here done any better than you this season ?
—Yes, some of them have got their ten and twelve barrels —those who have fished best.
31558. If you had bigger boats would you go and try the fishing at Barra and Stornoway ?
—Yes, if we had them we would try it, of course.
31559. But there is no boat here big enough to do that?
—There is one boat ; the people brought her from the south two years ago.
31560. Has it been at Stornoway or the east coast this season?
—Not this summer.
Letterfearn, 3 August 1883 - William Grant & Alexander Maclennan
WILLIAM GRANT, Crofter's Brother (42), assisted by ALEXANDER MACLENNAN, Crofter's Son (38), Letterfearn—examined.
31456. Sheriff Nicolson.
—Have you any statement to make9
—We have.
Statement of William Grant, a delegate from Letterfearn.
—My father was a tenant in Easter Achanataird, and paid rent to four successive proprietors. His summing was two cows with their followers, sixteen sheep, and five hoggs, and paid £6, 12s. 6d. as rent. When all the tenants were removed from the said township, in order that the same should be added to the farm of Leackachan, my father was not one penny in arrears with his rent, as his receipts can yet show. He was removed to our present abode, getting only an acre of land. At present in Letterfearn one crofter has three acres two others have two acres each, thirteen have one acre apiece, seven others have the eighth part of an acre each, fifteen families are without any lands whatever, and there are seven paupers two of whom have one-eighth each. The reason why our part of the parish is so crowded is due to the evictions that took place in the other parts of it, in order to make room for large sheep farms even as far back as the times when the Earls of Seaforth were proprietors. Some of those evicted families were sent in among the Letterfearn people. Our lots being so small, many of us have had to use the same land entirely for potato crops, without change for thirty years. We have to pay a rent of £ l , 10s. for the old Scotch acre for our lands,—also 5s. a year for sea-ware, which we can only use every second year. As the sea-ware allotted to us is not sufficient for our needs, we must buy more of it from the neighbouring farmers. In the parish of Glenshiel no crofter, either on Sir Alexander's estate or on any other landlord's, has one cow's grazing rented from them. .We get the summer quarter's grazing from the farmers at the rate of £1 per cow. The rest of the year our cows have to be tethered on our own small lots or fed in our byres. This spring our worthy proprietor has kindly advanced seed potatoes at 9s. per barrel, which we would be glad to receive almost at any price.' '
Statement of Alexander Maclennan, delegate from Letterfearn.
—My grandfather and father were paying rent to four proprietors in Wester Achanataird. My father was removed from the grazing lands without being in arrears with his rent. All the other and tenants were removed at the same time in order that their grazing lands might increase the late Mr Finlayson's farm, who was at that time the proprietor's factor. Our houses, which were then situated on the high ground, were broken down, and our present ones built almost on the seabeach, so that when an unusual high tide happens to come many of them are flooded. Ordinarily there is very little work going on on our side of Loch. Occasionally we may get some day's employment in the woods from the forester. We crofters sent a petition to Sir Alexander sixteen months ago, praying that whenever the lands we formerly occupied would be again at his disposal, that he would kindly direct his factor to reinstate us in them at their present rent. The factor visited us, and promised to increase our holdings. If what we learn from other sources be true, the land proposed to be given to us is entirely inadequate to our wants.'
31457. How many families are there altogether at Letterfearn ?
—Sixteen having land, and fifteen having no land.
31458. How long have those who have no land been there ?
—Those in the township in which I live were deprived of their land thirty-one years ago, when it was added to Leackachan.
31459. When was the land allotted as it is at present at Letterfearn ?
—They were deprived of Druidaig about thirty-six years ago, and of West Achanataird about thirty-four yeais ago. Achanataird was added to Druidaig.
31460. Is Druidaig a sheep farm ?
—Yes.
31461. When did the division of the land as it is at present take place 1 Was it done at once or by degrees ?
—It was done gradually. First Druidaig, which the factor took into his own hands, then West Achanataird, which the factor also took into his own hands ; and then East Achanataird was also added to Leackachan.
31462. Was the land redistributed on each of these occasions after some had been taken from them ?
—Yes.
31463. Were the crofts subdivided and re-allotted, or left as they were?
—It was allotted or subdivided into small lots.
31464. Were the rents going down also ?
—When the grazings were taken away the rents were reduced, of course.
31465. How does it happen that one crofter has three acres, another two, and thirteen only one acre apiece ?
—Because that was the factor's way.
31466. How many of these have cows?
—Ten.
31467. None of those who have only one-eighth part of an acre can keep a cow ?
—No.
31468. How do those seven people who have only one-eighth part of an acre, and the other fifteen who have no land at all, live ?
—They go about here and there often to offer assistance for potato land to help them to live.
31469. Have some to go far away for that purpose ?
—Some of them go three or four miles, and some cross the loch to plant potatoes.
31470. Where do they get work?
—There is very little work on this estate except some wood work, especially after gales.
31471. Do you not go to the south or to the east coast for work ?
—Hardly any of us go there, but we fish about the place.
31472. How do you make money enough to pay for the place on which you live ?
—Some years we do pretty well by the fishing, and other years not, and in that case the merchant gives credit till such time as we are able to pay him.
31473. Is there a man in every family of the place ?
—Yes, usually.
31474. You chiefly depend for your living upon fishing ?
—We have no other source of living but that.
31475. Is that herring fishing ?
—Yes.
31476. Where do you fish?
—For two years chiefly in Loch Hourn, very little being got in Loch Duich.
31477. Are you well provided with boats and nets?
—Some are and some are not, but they are improving in that respect.
31478. Are they getting a larger class of boats?
—Yes, they have been getting larger within the last few years.
31479. Where do you get them from ?
—They are built at Dornie. The people buy timber and employ a local carpenter.
31480. If the quality of your boats has been improving, it would seem that your own condition also is improving ; is that so ?
—The chief reason is that we have to go to Loch Hourn, and big boats are more suitable; and several of us usually join and go in company.
31481. Are the people of Letterfearn very much in debt?
—They are so generally before the fishing begins.
31482. Are they much in debt to merchants for food ?
—Some of them for meal and other provisions.
31483. But on the whole you are not so sunk in debt but you will be able to get over it before the year's end ?
—If there is a good fishing, but if not our debts will be heavier.
31484. How are you off for a harbour?
—We don't complain at all of it.
31485. Your houses are not good?
—They are not.
31486. Who built them?
—At first they were scattered, but when the people were huddled together the houses were all within the water mark, and in consequence they were sometimes flooded, and some of our gear was injured.
31487. Did your fathers get any compensation for the houses from which they were removed?
—They got no compensation, only they built these houses for them, and usually two or three families were put under the same roof.
31488. Are they so still?
—In the same way.
31489. But are the families not separated by walls?
—There is a wall erected between them.
31490. How many rooms are there in those houses?
—In some one and others two.
31491. Does the tide come into them sometimes?
—Yes, very often.
31492. To what depth ?
—In three houses it was calculated that it rose to the height of three feet.
31493. When did that happen?
—Three years ago during the great tide.
31494. Does it ever happen with an ordinary high spring tide?
—-Occasionally, generally in the spring.
31495. Why were the houses built so close to the sea?
—Because it was the proprietor's order, or his factor's.
31496. Was it done for the convenience of the people, or to save the land?
—I think it was to save the land that they built them so near the sea.
31497. You say you sent a petition to the laird about sixteen months ago and that you were visited by the factor, who promised to increase your holding; have you had any communication with him on the subject since then?
— The factors came to see us when we were assembled in the schoolhouse.
31498. When ?
—The first time they came, and said they would send now to the proprietor and see whether he would grant the request or assist us in any way. They came to us again, and they were promising a piece of ground; and then they came a third time, and said the land was given to us. They showed no boundaries and pointed out no land, but told us it was in the upper part of the township, and when the Whitsunday term passed they spoke to us and asked why we did not put out our cattle on the land. But at that time the cattle had been sent as usual to pasture on the farmer's land. Since then, within the last two or three days, they have been seeing us again, when they said they would give us land to support fifteen cows, but those who know what stock land will carry say that it won't carry more than seven, and others who are judges of the value of land declare the value to be, say £1 .per cow of rent. But the factor's rent was to be £15. Those who have the land already, because of its deterioration by the steepness of the slope and floods and the continuous cropping, say they would be entitled to get the whole of this new land along with their crop.
31499. What is the rent that the thirteen pay for the one acre ?
—30s. for the land and 5s. for sea-ware, although they cannot cut it but every second year.
31500. To whom do they pay for the sea-ware ?
—To the proprietor.
31501. Has that always been the custom ?
—Yes, it was more than that at one time.
31502. How is it you can only have it every second year?
—Because it takes two years to grow.
31503. Professor Mackinnon.
—This pasture which has been promised to you, the factor says is sufficient for fifteen cows, and you say only for seven ?
—Yes.
31504. Is there plenty of ground round about to support a cow for each of you ?
—Plenty.
31505. Suitable ground ?
—Quite suitable for cattle.
31506. Since you got this very small croft how do you expect to make your living ? Is it by crofting and fishing?
—During those years in which the fishing would not do so well the land would be a great help to keep us out of debt.
31507. Might not there be a danger, that people would spend too much time upon the croft and too little upon the fishing?
—Fishing has a time for itself.
31508. Do you think you could work a good croft and still attend to the fishing in its own time ?
—Yes.
31509. What is the fishing time here?
—During autumn.
31510. How much land was it you asked the proprietor to give you ?
—We wanted to get all we had formerly.
31511. And that is now added to the farm of Druidaig?
—It was added partly to Druidaig and partly to Leackachan.
31512. And if you got that, you would put up houses as they were before ?
—We would try to do so with help.
31513. Have you any idea of the stock you had in old times when you had these places ?
—Two had one cow, some of them had also sheep ; the rent ranged from £3, 10s. to £5.
31514. Supposing you were to get the land you had before, do you think you would be able yourselves to stock it again ?
—If the price of sheep were as formerly we could easily do it, but the price of sheep is now so high that we might have considerable difficulty in doing it. But still we would try.
31515. You don't think the proprietor would lose anything by giving you back these lands ?
—It was a loss to the proprietor when our land was taken from us.
31516. Do you think that your people were paying more rent for that land than the proprietor is getting now ?
—Yes, they were paying more. When it was given to the farmer he got a reduction of £10.
31517. And you would be willing to pay for it now what the present tenant is paying for it if you got it back ?
—We would do so rather than want, but if we could get it cheaper we would prefer it.
31518. Can you give any reason why the proprietor took that from you and gave it to another man for £ 10 less of rent?
—I cannot say whether the proprietor wished it or not, but probably the factor did it, wishing to add to his own farm of Druidaig; and meanwhile he gave it at a lower rent to another man Macrae, finally meaning at the same time to add it to his own farm.
31519. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Do you know the estate of Glenshiel pretty well ?
—Yes, I was a shepherd a long time.
31520. Are there any crofters upon Baillie's estate of Glenshiel ?
—Not one.
31521. Is it a pretty considerable estate ?
—Yes, very large.
31522. Were there small people upon it once?
—Yes, up in the glens here and there.
31523. And some alongside the loch ?
—Two. You see the foundations of the houses still.
31524. Have you heard any of your predecessors mention how many people were removed from Glenshiel ?
—I cannot say as to that.
31525. Must there have been a considerable number, judging from the remains ?
—That is quite apparent from the appearances of habitations. They were numerous in the glens in former times.
31526. Wrhat became of these people? Were they put out of the country altogether or sent to adjoining proprietors ?
—Some of them left the kingdom, and others were sent down to the sea-shore.
31527. Upon other proprietors, I presume ?
—Most of them settled upon other proprietors.
31528. Had the person who was the proprietor of Glenshiel at that time any other land than what now belongs to Baillie ?
—We cannot say ; it was one Dick, an Englishman, who was proprietor.
31529. Was he long proprietor?
—Yes, he was some years.
31530. What became of him?
—He died in Rattagan.
31531. Is the farm of Rattagan a very suitable place for cultivation by crofters ? Is there a good deal of land ?
—It was in small crofts at one time, and is the most suitable land of any—excellent land for the purpose.
31532. Did you bear that the people who have removed were well off in their circumstances ?
—They were comfortable enough as long as they had the land.
31456. Sheriff Nicolson.
—Have you any statement to make9
—We have.
Statement of William Grant, a delegate from Letterfearn.
—My father was a tenant in Easter Achanataird, and paid rent to four successive proprietors. His summing was two cows with their followers, sixteen sheep, and five hoggs, and paid £6, 12s. 6d. as rent. When all the tenants were removed from the said township, in order that the same should be added to the farm of Leackachan, my father was not one penny in arrears with his rent, as his receipts can yet show. He was removed to our present abode, getting only an acre of land. At present in Letterfearn one crofter has three acres two others have two acres each, thirteen have one acre apiece, seven others have the eighth part of an acre each, fifteen families are without any lands whatever, and there are seven paupers two of whom have one-eighth each. The reason why our part of the parish is so crowded is due to the evictions that took place in the other parts of it, in order to make room for large sheep farms even as far back as the times when the Earls of Seaforth were proprietors. Some of those evicted families were sent in among the Letterfearn people. Our lots being so small, many of us have had to use the same land entirely for potato crops, without change for thirty years. We have to pay a rent of £ l , 10s. for the old Scotch acre for our lands,—also 5s. a year for sea-ware, which we can only use every second year. As the sea-ware allotted to us is not sufficient for our needs, we must buy more of it from the neighbouring farmers. In the parish of Glenshiel no crofter, either on Sir Alexander's estate or on any other landlord's, has one cow's grazing rented from them. .We get the summer quarter's grazing from the farmers at the rate of £1 per cow. The rest of the year our cows have to be tethered on our own small lots or fed in our byres. This spring our worthy proprietor has kindly advanced seed potatoes at 9s. per barrel, which we would be glad to receive almost at any price.' '
Statement of Alexander Maclennan, delegate from Letterfearn.
—My grandfather and father were paying rent to four proprietors in Wester Achanataird. My father was removed from the grazing lands without being in arrears with his rent. All the other and tenants were removed at the same time in order that their grazing lands might increase the late Mr Finlayson's farm, who was at that time the proprietor's factor. Our houses, which were then situated on the high ground, were broken down, and our present ones built almost on the seabeach, so that when an unusual high tide happens to come many of them are flooded. Ordinarily there is very little work going on on our side of Loch. Occasionally we may get some day's employment in the woods from the forester. We crofters sent a petition to Sir Alexander sixteen months ago, praying that whenever the lands we formerly occupied would be again at his disposal, that he would kindly direct his factor to reinstate us in them at their present rent. The factor visited us, and promised to increase our holdings. If what we learn from other sources be true, the land proposed to be given to us is entirely inadequate to our wants.'
31457. How many families are there altogether at Letterfearn ?
—Sixteen having land, and fifteen having no land.
31458. How long have those who have no land been there ?
—Those in the township in which I live were deprived of their land thirty-one years ago, when it was added to Leackachan.
31459. When was the land allotted as it is at present at Letterfearn ?
—They were deprived of Druidaig about thirty-six years ago, and of West Achanataird about thirty-four yeais ago. Achanataird was added to Druidaig.
31460. Is Druidaig a sheep farm ?
—Yes.
31461. When did the division of the land as it is at present take place 1 Was it done at once or by degrees ?
—It was done gradually. First Druidaig, which the factor took into his own hands, then West Achanataird, which the factor also took into his own hands ; and then East Achanataird was also added to Leackachan.
31462. Was the land redistributed on each of these occasions after some had been taken from them ?
—Yes.
31463. Were the crofts subdivided and re-allotted, or left as they were?
—It was allotted or subdivided into small lots.
31464. Were the rents going down also ?
—When the grazings were taken away the rents were reduced, of course.
31465. How does it happen that one crofter has three acres, another two, and thirteen only one acre apiece ?
—Because that was the factor's way.
31466. How many of these have cows?
—Ten.
31467. None of those who have only one-eighth part of an acre can keep a cow ?
—No.
31468. How do those seven people who have only one-eighth part of an acre, and the other fifteen who have no land at all, live ?
—They go about here and there often to offer assistance for potato land to help them to live.
31469. Have some to go far away for that purpose ?
—Some of them go three or four miles, and some cross the loch to plant potatoes.
31470. Where do they get work?
—There is very little work on this estate except some wood work, especially after gales.
31471. Do you not go to the south or to the east coast for work ?
—Hardly any of us go there, but we fish about the place.
31472. How do you make money enough to pay for the place on which you live ?
—Some years we do pretty well by the fishing, and other years not, and in that case the merchant gives credit till such time as we are able to pay him.
31473. Is there a man in every family of the place ?
—Yes, usually.
31474. You chiefly depend for your living upon fishing ?
—We have no other source of living but that.
31475. Is that herring fishing ?
—Yes.
31476. Where do you fish?
—For two years chiefly in Loch Hourn, very little being got in Loch Duich.
31477. Are you well provided with boats and nets?
—Some are and some are not, but they are improving in that respect.
31478. Are they getting a larger class of boats?
—Yes, they have been getting larger within the last few years.
31479. Where do you get them from ?
—They are built at Dornie. The people buy timber and employ a local carpenter.
31480. If the quality of your boats has been improving, it would seem that your own condition also is improving ; is that so ?
—The chief reason is that we have to go to Loch Hourn, and big boats are more suitable; and several of us usually join and go in company.
31481. Are the people of Letterfearn very much in debt?
—They are so generally before the fishing begins.
31482. Are they much in debt to merchants for food ?
—Some of them for meal and other provisions.
31483. But on the whole you are not so sunk in debt but you will be able to get over it before the year's end ?
—If there is a good fishing, but if not our debts will be heavier.
31484. How are you off for a harbour?
—We don't complain at all of it.
31485. Your houses are not good?
—They are not.
31486. Who built them?
—At first they were scattered, but when the people were huddled together the houses were all within the water mark, and in consequence they were sometimes flooded, and some of our gear was injured.
31487. Did your fathers get any compensation for the houses from which they were removed?
—They got no compensation, only they built these houses for them, and usually two or three families were put under the same roof.
31488. Are they so still?
—In the same way.
31489. But are the families not separated by walls?
—There is a wall erected between them.
31490. How many rooms are there in those houses?
—In some one and others two.
31491. Does the tide come into them sometimes?
—Yes, very often.
31492. To what depth ?
—In three houses it was calculated that it rose to the height of three feet.
31493. When did that happen?
—Three years ago during the great tide.
31494. Does it ever happen with an ordinary high spring tide?
—-Occasionally, generally in the spring.
31495. Why were the houses built so close to the sea?
—Because it was the proprietor's order, or his factor's.
31496. Was it done for the convenience of the people, or to save the land?
—I think it was to save the land that they built them so near the sea.
31497. You say you sent a petition to the laird about sixteen months ago and that you were visited by the factor, who promised to increase your holding; have you had any communication with him on the subject since then?
— The factors came to see us when we were assembled in the schoolhouse.
31498. When ?
—The first time they came, and said they would send now to the proprietor and see whether he would grant the request or assist us in any way. They came to us again, and they were promising a piece of ground; and then they came a third time, and said the land was given to us. They showed no boundaries and pointed out no land, but told us it was in the upper part of the township, and when the Whitsunday term passed they spoke to us and asked why we did not put out our cattle on the land. But at that time the cattle had been sent as usual to pasture on the farmer's land. Since then, within the last two or three days, they have been seeing us again, when they said they would give us land to support fifteen cows, but those who know what stock land will carry say that it won't carry more than seven, and others who are judges of the value of land declare the value to be, say £1 .per cow of rent. But the factor's rent was to be £15. Those who have the land already, because of its deterioration by the steepness of the slope and floods and the continuous cropping, say they would be entitled to get the whole of this new land along with their crop.
31499. What is the rent that the thirteen pay for the one acre ?
—30s. for the land and 5s. for sea-ware, although they cannot cut it but every second year.
31500. To whom do they pay for the sea-ware ?
—To the proprietor.
31501. Has that always been the custom ?
—Yes, it was more than that at one time.
31502. How is it you can only have it every second year?
—Because it takes two years to grow.
31503. Professor Mackinnon.
—This pasture which has been promised to you, the factor says is sufficient for fifteen cows, and you say only for seven ?
—Yes.
31504. Is there plenty of ground round about to support a cow for each of you ?
—Plenty.
31505. Suitable ground ?
—Quite suitable for cattle.
31506. Since you got this very small croft how do you expect to make your living ? Is it by crofting and fishing?
—During those years in which the fishing would not do so well the land would be a great help to keep us out of debt.
31507. Might not there be a danger, that people would spend too much time upon the croft and too little upon the fishing?
—Fishing has a time for itself.
31508. Do you think you could work a good croft and still attend to the fishing in its own time ?
—Yes.
31509. What is the fishing time here?
—During autumn.
31510. How much land was it you asked the proprietor to give you ?
—We wanted to get all we had formerly.
31511. And that is now added to the farm of Druidaig?
—It was added partly to Druidaig and partly to Leackachan.
31512. And if you got that, you would put up houses as they were before ?
—We would try to do so with help.
31513. Have you any idea of the stock you had in old times when you had these places ?
—Two had one cow, some of them had also sheep ; the rent ranged from £3, 10s. to £5.
31514. Supposing you were to get the land you had before, do you think you would be able yourselves to stock it again ?
—If the price of sheep were as formerly we could easily do it, but the price of sheep is now so high that we might have considerable difficulty in doing it. But still we would try.
31515. You don't think the proprietor would lose anything by giving you back these lands ?
—It was a loss to the proprietor when our land was taken from us.
31516. Do you think that your people were paying more rent for that land than the proprietor is getting now ?
—Yes, they were paying more. When it was given to the farmer he got a reduction of £10.
31517. And you would be willing to pay for it now what the present tenant is paying for it if you got it back ?
—We would do so rather than want, but if we could get it cheaper we would prefer it.
31518. Can you give any reason why the proprietor took that from you and gave it to another man for £ 10 less of rent?
—I cannot say whether the proprietor wished it or not, but probably the factor did it, wishing to add to his own farm of Druidaig; and meanwhile he gave it at a lower rent to another man Macrae, finally meaning at the same time to add it to his own farm.
31519. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Do you know the estate of Glenshiel pretty well ?
—Yes, I was a shepherd a long time.
31520. Are there any crofters upon Baillie's estate of Glenshiel ?
—Not one.
31521. Is it a pretty considerable estate ?
—Yes, very large.
31522. Were there small people upon it once?
—Yes, up in the glens here and there.
31523. And some alongside the loch ?
—Two. You see the foundations of the houses still.
31524. Have you heard any of your predecessors mention how many people were removed from Glenshiel ?
—I cannot say as to that.
31525. Must there have been a considerable number, judging from the remains ?
—That is quite apparent from the appearances of habitations. They were numerous in the glens in former times.
31526. Wrhat became of these people? Were they put out of the country altogether or sent to adjoining proprietors ?
—Some of them left the kingdom, and others were sent down to the sea-shore.
31527. Upon other proprietors, I presume ?
—Most of them settled upon other proprietors.
31528. Had the person who was the proprietor of Glenshiel at that time any other land than what now belongs to Baillie ?
—We cannot say ; it was one Dick, an Englishman, who was proprietor.
31529. Was he long proprietor?
—Yes, he was some years.
31530. What became of him?
—He died in Rattagan.
31531. Is the farm of Rattagan a very suitable place for cultivation by crofters ? Is there a good deal of land ?
—It was in small crofts at one time, and is the most suitable land of any—excellent land for the purpose.
31532. Did you bear that the people who have removed were well off in their circumstances ?
—They were comfortable enough as long as they had the land.
Letterfearn, 3 August 1883 - Rev Roderick Morison
Rev. RODERICK MORISON, Minister of the Parish of Kintail—examined.
31380. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Have you a statement which you wish to read?
—Yes. 'I am a native of the parish of Kintail, and have resided in it all my life, except for about fourteen years, during which I was settled in other parishes. During that time, however, I was in constant communication with the parish, and visited it frequently. I am therefore intimately acquainted with the condition of the people, with almost every individual of whom I am personally acquainted. The population at the last census was 688—of these about fifty are paupers; there being, including lunatics in the asylum and paupers resident in other parishes, about sixty persons on the poors' roll —of these twenty-three are resident in the villages of Bundaloch and Carndubh. I attribute the excessive pauperism of the parish to the large number of people who have no land 1 worth speaking of. The population has decreased in round numbers about one hundred in each decade during my time, except in the last, when the decrease was sixty-five. The parish is said to contain 213 square miles, which gives an average population of a little over one family to two square miles. I consider that the condition of the people has materially improved in respect of comforts since the earliest times I can remember. My recollections, however, date from a period of exceptional severity, which followed on the failure of the potato crop. The causes of this increased comfort and prosperity are not easy to define, but the fact is beyond question. The people are better clad, fed, and educated than they were a generation ago. They have learned to do more for themselves, have more intercourse with the south, and more friends and relatives there, have better fishing gear, and get better prices for anything they can produce. Some of them are, however, in great poverty still, and how they manage to support themselves it is very difficult to see. There is an almost entire absence of crime among them. During the five years I have been minister here, there has not been a single case before the courts unless one or two trifling breaches of the peace—the most serious of which was, I believe, punished by a fine of 10s. There have been no evictions from houses within my time; but besides the general eviction at Bundaloch, of which evidence is to-day before the Commission, there have been several evictions from lands for non-payment of rent and for keeping shebeens. I think that the management of the estate of Sir Alexander Matheson has been, split from the Bundaloch case, on the whole judicious and kindly, and does not at present afford much ground for complaint. The tenants have been assisted to build better houses; in many cases feus or building leases have been granted to suitable persons, at the village of Dornie substantial reductions of rent have been granted, and generally it appears to me that all that could reasonably be expected has been done for those who are tenants. The whole of the inhabited portion of the parish belongs to Sir Alexander Matheson—the portion belonging to Chisholm of Chisholm being entirely deer forest and a sheep farm. A large portion of the grazing land in the heights of the parish has been turned into deer forests. £1905 is paid for forest land in the parish by one person, who in this and the two adjoining parishes pays £3395 for forest land, besides a large sum for the shooting of land farmed by tenants. I entertain very strong opinions as to the injurious effects of deer forests on the country and the people, and if the time at the disposal of the Commissioners admits (or if they will receive a written statement from me on the subject hereafter) should much desire an opportunity of stating my views on that subject
—R. MORISON.'
31381. You state that the management of Sir Alexander Matheson's property has been in the main good, with the exception of the eviction of Bundaloch?
—Yes.
31382. And you say there were other evictions for shebeening and non-payment of rent ?
—Yes.
31383. Did these evictions at Bundaloch not take place for non-payment of rent ?
—I don't know; they were before my time.
31384. And you make these statements without knowing the circumstances?
—I know the people were in great poverty, and likely to be in arrears.
31385. That time followed upon the destitution of 1847-48?
—Yes.
31386. Were arrears common throughout the country at the time ?
—I presume so, but that is rather previous to my recollection.
31387. Mr Cameron.
—With regard to the subdivision of the crofts, I suppose you would like to see the cottars enjoy a certain portion of the land ?
—Certainly.
31388. Do you think the land near where they reside is suitable for their occupation ?
—Yes, but there is not enough for them in the neighbourhood.
31389. How many cottars without land are there altogether in the parish ?
—I should think about forty; but that is only a guess.
31390. In what portion of the parish could these cottars find land suitable for their occupation?
—Some of them about Bundaloch.
31391. Could any of these cottars obtain land without subdividing the farms?
—No, I think not; all the land is let to somebody.
31392. Are the farms which require to be subdivided large farms or moderate sized ones ?
—We have only one farm which can be called large—Kilellan—which pays £840 I think.
31393. Could any portion of that be suitably given to form crofts?
—I think so.
31394. Are there any cottars resident on that farm?
—Yes; I think three or four.
31395. Is the land in the immediate vicinity of where these cottars reside suitable for cultivation —the land on the large farm ?
—Yes.
31396. What is the size of the other farms on which the cottars reside ?
—Most of them reside on Bundaloch, which pays a rent of, I think, £130.
31397. Would Bundaloch farm be suitable on which to establish a township of crofters ?
—I think so.
31398. Do you think these crofters could profitably occupy the arable land belonging to this farm without the grazing ?
—Yes, but not without some of the grazing.
31399. Grazing for what stock would you suggest?
—One cow each.
31400. Do you think that might be done and leave Bundaloch farm a suitable holding for the tenant ?
—I cannot offer any opinion as to that.
31401. Are these people of whom you speak likely, supposing they get crofts, to subdivide them ?
—Yes, unless they were prevented.
31402. Do you think these people here have any great inclination to subdivide ?
—No, I think not; they have not had the chance.
31403. Do you think that by proper estate management the subdivision of which we have found to be one of the greatest evils in the Western Highlands, might be prevented ?
—I think so, but I don't think it would be difficult to prevent. We have not many marriages going on or many new families springing up. I think most people consider their crofts small enough.
31404. You say the cottars to whom you refer are in tolerably good circumstances—that is better circumstances than they were in twenty or thirty years ago ?
—I think so.
31405. You say it is difficult to account for that. In what way do they earn wages, or do they earn wages ?
—Well, there is very little employment going in the parish; fishing is the chief source of income.
31406. Do many of the people go south to get work, and come back in spring ?
—No, none I think.
31407. They all reside here the whole year round ?
—Yes, very much
31408. How do they live?
—Really it is hard to say.
31409. Have they any land ?
—They are very frugal in their habits, and make a little off the fishing; and sometimes they get an occasional chance of labour.
31410. But they have no land except potato ground?
—That is so.
31411. They have all get a bit of potato ground?
—They have all a patch.
31412. Do many of them have a cow's grass?
—Nearly all of them.
31413. And they don't go south to get labour?
—Not much.
31414. Must not labour in the district be very scarce ?
—There is a little sometimes in Lochalsh parish, but very little in the district; but then the number of able-bodied men is not large.
31415. How many able-bodied men are there out of this number of cottars ?
—Perhaps twenty-five able-bodied cottars.
31416. Do they sometimes do work for the better class of crofters?
—Sometimes.
31417. Do they do any work for the big farmers?
—Some of them do, and a good many of them go to wintering hoggs.
31418. So that they do get in point of fact employment ?
—They get the means of living somehow.
31419. And they eke out what they get by labour of this character by fishing?
—Yes.
31420. Herring or deep sea fishing?
—Exclusively the herring fishing.
31421. Do the herrings come to Loch Duich now ?
—Not for some years; but they went to Loch Hourn.
31422. There was a good season there last year?
—There was, but our people didn't get much advantage of it, and they were run off the ground by the big boats. The heavy boats and large crews were too many for them, and many of our people had to give it up.
31423. Are they not good fishermen?
—There are better fishermen than they are.
31424. Do you think if they had better boats they would perhaps be encouraged to fish more and better ?
—No doubt they would, and they are improving; they are getting better boats.
31425. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—You were good enough to say you would send in a paper at a later period, but I wish to ask you a few questions. You have stated that there are 213 square miles in the parish of Kintail, that would make 130,000 or 140,000 acres. Can you tell me how much of that in your parish is under forest?
—I cannot give the acreage, but I should think something like one-fourth of this parish. We are at this moment iu the parish of Glenshiel, but I mean my own parish of Kintail.
31426. Betwixt where we are now sitting and the head of the loch there is the farm of Rattagan ?
—Yes.
31427. There is the appearance of a considerable population having been there at one time ?
—Yes, there are some traces of cultivation.
31428. Do you know anything about the time the people were removed from Glenshiel ?
—No, I don't.
31429. Was it before your time?
—Yes, long before.
31430. Have you heard there were great evictions?
—Yes, the people were removed somehow by eviction.
31431. Who was the person that removed them?
—I think some of them were removed by Mr Dick, who held the property at one time. I know he removed some from Rattagan, but I don't know how many. These things were long before my time.
31432. Your family have been ministers of Kintail three or four generations?
—Three generations.
31433. Is it not the fact that this man Dick was threatened to be shot for his cruelty to the people ?
—Yes.
31434. I believe you have taken a good deal of interest in connection with deer. Is it not a fact that from within about a mile of the Beauly Railway Station you can walk without putting a foot on anything but deer forest land till you reach the Cro of Kintail?
—Yes.
31435. Practically from sea to sea?
—Yes.
31436. Do you know it to be the case that there are also some fourteen miles of continuous deer forest land in Glen Cannich alone?
—Yes, I have ridden all over it.
31437. Is it not the fact that the whole of the north side of Glen Affric is one vast deer forest extending also to the Cro of Kintail ?
—The farm of Lienessie comes into it.
31438. Are not the whole of Guisachan and its glens, except the mains or home farm on the estate, under deer ?
—I believe so.
31439. And it reaches also to the Cro of Kintail?
—No, I think not.
31440. What is between?
—Inchancrow and the farm of Knockfin, occupied by Mr Winans as a sheep farm.
31441. Is it the case that from Inver Moriston, the south side of Glen Moriston, is one unbroken deer forest, reaching to Kintail?
—It does not reach to Kintail, but to the parish of Glenshiel.
31442. Is it not a fact that from within about a mile of Balmacaan in Glen Urquhart you can walk on forest ground till you reach Kintail?
—I believe so.
31443. Is it not also the case that from Inver Garry House you can walk on forest land all the way down to the sea at Knoydart ?
—I think so. I may add that I have been told that from a short distance of Loch Broom you can walk on deer forest land until within a short distance of Perth.
31444. Do you consider that the extension of afforestment at the rate at which it is going on, is for the public weal ?
—Certainly not—not for the ultimate welfare of anybody.
31445. Since your family have been so long resident in the same place, and must necessarily have handed down traditions from father to son, I wish you to state what your own opinion is of the condition of the people in Kintail, and the adjoining places hereabout, prior to the introduction of
sheep farms ?
—I think there would be a much larger number of people in circumstances of comparative comfort than there are now, but I think there were perhaps some people poorer than any that now exist.
31446. How would you distribute the proportion of those that were in circumstances and those who were worse off than they are now?
—That must be a mere guess. I should say half the people were better off and half worse.
31447. There is a deal of poverty about here just now?
—Too great.
31448. Did you hear what the people of Morvich said to-day?
—I did.
31449. It seems rather a pitiable case, is it not?
—Very much so indeed.
31450. Is it not the case, at all events, with regard to them that so far as the soil they possess is concerned, if they were dependent upon it they could not exist ?
—Certainly.
31451. Taken all in all, is not Loch Duich with its mountain surroundings, perhaps the most beautiful in the West Highlands, or any part of Scotland ?
—I think so.
31452. And along with that there is unfortunately a deal of poverty?
—Yes.
31453. In the finest scenery in the Highlands?
—Yes.
31454. How would you reconcile the two things, insuring in this beautiful place a happy and prosperous people ?
—By giving a moderate holding of land to a certain number of them; those who are able to work.
31455. And the land is there ?
—And the land is there.
31380. Sir Kenneth Mackenzie.
—Have you a statement which you wish to read?
—Yes. 'I am a native of the parish of Kintail, and have resided in it all my life, except for about fourteen years, during which I was settled in other parishes. During that time, however, I was in constant communication with the parish, and visited it frequently. I am therefore intimately acquainted with the condition of the people, with almost every individual of whom I am personally acquainted. The population at the last census was 688—of these about fifty are paupers; there being, including lunatics in the asylum and paupers resident in other parishes, about sixty persons on the poors' roll —of these twenty-three are resident in the villages of Bundaloch and Carndubh. I attribute the excessive pauperism of the parish to the large number of people who have no land 1 worth speaking of. The population has decreased in round numbers about one hundred in each decade during my time, except in the last, when the decrease was sixty-five. The parish is said to contain 213 square miles, which gives an average population of a little over one family to two square miles. I consider that the condition of the people has materially improved in respect of comforts since the earliest times I can remember. My recollections, however, date from a period of exceptional severity, which followed on the failure of the potato crop. The causes of this increased comfort and prosperity are not easy to define, but the fact is beyond question. The people are better clad, fed, and educated than they were a generation ago. They have learned to do more for themselves, have more intercourse with the south, and more friends and relatives there, have better fishing gear, and get better prices for anything they can produce. Some of them are, however, in great poverty still, and how they manage to support themselves it is very difficult to see. There is an almost entire absence of crime among them. During the five years I have been minister here, there has not been a single case before the courts unless one or two trifling breaches of the peace—the most serious of which was, I believe, punished by a fine of 10s. There have been no evictions from houses within my time; but besides the general eviction at Bundaloch, of which evidence is to-day before the Commission, there have been several evictions from lands for non-payment of rent and for keeping shebeens. I think that the management of the estate of Sir Alexander Matheson has been, split from the Bundaloch case, on the whole judicious and kindly, and does not at present afford much ground for complaint. The tenants have been assisted to build better houses; in many cases feus or building leases have been granted to suitable persons, at the village of Dornie substantial reductions of rent have been granted, and generally it appears to me that all that could reasonably be expected has been done for those who are tenants. The whole of the inhabited portion of the parish belongs to Sir Alexander Matheson—the portion belonging to Chisholm of Chisholm being entirely deer forest and a sheep farm. A large portion of the grazing land in the heights of the parish has been turned into deer forests. £1905 is paid for forest land in the parish by one person, who in this and the two adjoining parishes pays £3395 for forest land, besides a large sum for the shooting of land farmed by tenants. I entertain very strong opinions as to the injurious effects of deer forests on the country and the people, and if the time at the disposal of the Commissioners admits (or if they will receive a written statement from me on the subject hereafter) should much desire an opportunity of stating my views on that subject
—R. MORISON.'
31381. You state that the management of Sir Alexander Matheson's property has been in the main good, with the exception of the eviction of Bundaloch?
—Yes.
31382. And you say there were other evictions for shebeening and non-payment of rent ?
—Yes.
31383. Did these evictions at Bundaloch not take place for non-payment of rent ?
—I don't know; they were before my time.
31384. And you make these statements without knowing the circumstances?
—I know the people were in great poverty, and likely to be in arrears.
31385. That time followed upon the destitution of 1847-48?
—Yes.
31386. Were arrears common throughout the country at the time ?
—I presume so, but that is rather previous to my recollection.
31387. Mr Cameron.
—With regard to the subdivision of the crofts, I suppose you would like to see the cottars enjoy a certain portion of the land ?
—Certainly.
31388. Do you think the land near where they reside is suitable for their occupation ?
—Yes, but there is not enough for them in the neighbourhood.
31389. How many cottars without land are there altogether in the parish ?
—I should think about forty; but that is only a guess.
31390. In what portion of the parish could these cottars find land suitable for their occupation?
—Some of them about Bundaloch.
31391. Could any of these cottars obtain land without subdividing the farms?
—No, I think not; all the land is let to somebody.
31392. Are the farms which require to be subdivided large farms or moderate sized ones ?
—We have only one farm which can be called large—Kilellan—which pays £840 I think.
31393. Could any portion of that be suitably given to form crofts?
—I think so.
31394. Are there any cottars resident on that farm?
—Yes; I think three or four.
31395. Is the land in the immediate vicinity of where these cottars reside suitable for cultivation —the land on the large farm ?
—Yes.
31396. What is the size of the other farms on which the cottars reside ?
—Most of them reside on Bundaloch, which pays a rent of, I think, £130.
31397. Would Bundaloch farm be suitable on which to establish a township of crofters ?
—I think so.
31398. Do you think these crofters could profitably occupy the arable land belonging to this farm without the grazing ?
—Yes, but not without some of the grazing.
31399. Grazing for what stock would you suggest?
—One cow each.
31400. Do you think that might be done and leave Bundaloch farm a suitable holding for the tenant ?
—I cannot offer any opinion as to that.
31401. Are these people of whom you speak likely, supposing they get crofts, to subdivide them ?
—Yes, unless they were prevented.
31402. Do you think these people here have any great inclination to subdivide ?
—No, I think not; they have not had the chance.
31403. Do you think that by proper estate management the subdivision of which we have found to be one of the greatest evils in the Western Highlands, might be prevented ?
—I think so, but I don't think it would be difficult to prevent. We have not many marriages going on or many new families springing up. I think most people consider their crofts small enough.
31404. You say the cottars to whom you refer are in tolerably good circumstances—that is better circumstances than they were in twenty or thirty years ago ?
—I think so.
31405. You say it is difficult to account for that. In what way do they earn wages, or do they earn wages ?
—Well, there is very little employment going in the parish; fishing is the chief source of income.
31406. Do many of the people go south to get work, and come back in spring ?
—No, none I think.
31407. They all reside here the whole year round ?
—Yes, very much
31408. How do they live?
—Really it is hard to say.
31409. Have they any land ?
—They are very frugal in their habits, and make a little off the fishing; and sometimes they get an occasional chance of labour.
31410. But they have no land except potato ground?
—That is so.
31411. They have all get a bit of potato ground?
—They have all a patch.
31412. Do many of them have a cow's grass?
—Nearly all of them.
31413. And they don't go south to get labour?
—Not much.
31414. Must not labour in the district be very scarce ?
—There is a little sometimes in Lochalsh parish, but very little in the district; but then the number of able-bodied men is not large.
31415. How many able-bodied men are there out of this number of cottars ?
—Perhaps twenty-five able-bodied cottars.
31416. Do they sometimes do work for the better class of crofters?
—Sometimes.
31417. Do they do any work for the big farmers?
—Some of them do, and a good many of them go to wintering hoggs.
31418. So that they do get in point of fact employment ?
—They get the means of living somehow.
31419. And they eke out what they get by labour of this character by fishing?
—Yes.
31420. Herring or deep sea fishing?
—Exclusively the herring fishing.
31421. Do the herrings come to Loch Duich now ?
—Not for some years; but they went to Loch Hourn.
31422. There was a good season there last year?
—There was, but our people didn't get much advantage of it, and they were run off the ground by the big boats. The heavy boats and large crews were too many for them, and many of our people had to give it up.
31423. Are they not good fishermen?
—There are better fishermen than they are.
31424. Do you think if they had better boats they would perhaps be encouraged to fish more and better ?
—No doubt they would, and they are improving; they are getting better boats.
31425. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—You were good enough to say you would send in a paper at a later period, but I wish to ask you a few questions. You have stated that there are 213 square miles in the parish of Kintail, that would make 130,000 or 140,000 acres. Can you tell me how much of that in your parish is under forest?
—I cannot give the acreage, but I should think something like one-fourth of this parish. We are at this moment iu the parish of Glenshiel, but I mean my own parish of Kintail.
31426. Betwixt where we are now sitting and the head of the loch there is the farm of Rattagan ?
—Yes.
31427. There is the appearance of a considerable population having been there at one time ?
—Yes, there are some traces of cultivation.
31428. Do you know anything about the time the people were removed from Glenshiel ?
—No, I don't.
31429. Was it before your time?
—Yes, long before.
31430. Have you heard there were great evictions?
—Yes, the people were removed somehow by eviction.
31431. Who was the person that removed them?
—I think some of them were removed by Mr Dick, who held the property at one time. I know he removed some from Rattagan, but I don't know how many. These things were long before my time.
31432. Your family have been ministers of Kintail three or four generations?
—Three generations.
31433. Is it not the fact that this man Dick was threatened to be shot for his cruelty to the people ?
—Yes.
31434. I believe you have taken a good deal of interest in connection with deer. Is it not a fact that from within about a mile of the Beauly Railway Station you can walk without putting a foot on anything but deer forest land till you reach the Cro of Kintail?
—Yes.
31435. Practically from sea to sea?
—Yes.
31436. Do you know it to be the case that there are also some fourteen miles of continuous deer forest land in Glen Cannich alone?
—Yes, I have ridden all over it.
31437. Is it not the fact that the whole of the north side of Glen Affric is one vast deer forest extending also to the Cro of Kintail ?
—The farm of Lienessie comes into it.
31438. Are not the whole of Guisachan and its glens, except the mains or home farm on the estate, under deer ?
—I believe so.
31439. And it reaches also to the Cro of Kintail?
—No, I think not.
31440. What is between?
—Inchancrow and the farm of Knockfin, occupied by Mr Winans as a sheep farm.
31441. Is it the case that from Inver Moriston, the south side of Glen Moriston, is one unbroken deer forest, reaching to Kintail?
—It does not reach to Kintail, but to the parish of Glenshiel.
31442. Is it not a fact that from within about a mile of Balmacaan in Glen Urquhart you can walk on forest ground till you reach Kintail?
—I believe so.
31443. Is it not also the case that from Inver Garry House you can walk on forest land all the way down to the sea at Knoydart ?
—I think so. I may add that I have been told that from a short distance of Loch Broom you can walk on deer forest land until within a short distance of Perth.
31444. Do you consider that the extension of afforestment at the rate at which it is going on, is for the public weal ?
—Certainly not—not for the ultimate welfare of anybody.
31445. Since your family have been so long resident in the same place, and must necessarily have handed down traditions from father to son, I wish you to state what your own opinion is of the condition of the people in Kintail, and the adjoining places hereabout, prior to the introduction of
sheep farms ?
—I think there would be a much larger number of people in circumstances of comparative comfort than there are now, but I think there were perhaps some people poorer than any that now exist.
31446. How would you distribute the proportion of those that were in circumstances and those who were worse off than they are now?
—That must be a mere guess. I should say half the people were better off and half worse.
31447. There is a deal of poverty about here just now?
—Too great.
31448. Did you hear what the people of Morvich said to-day?
—I did.
31449. It seems rather a pitiable case, is it not?
—Very much so indeed.
31450. Is it not the case, at all events, with regard to them that so far as the soil they possess is concerned, if they were dependent upon it they could not exist ?
—Certainly.
31451. Taken all in all, is not Loch Duich with its mountain surroundings, perhaps the most beautiful in the West Highlands, or any part of Scotland ?
—I think so.
31452. And along with that there is unfortunately a deal of poverty?
—Yes.
31453. In the finest scenery in the Highlands?
—Yes.
31454. How would you reconcile the two things, insuring in this beautiful place a happy and prosperous people ?
—By giving a moderate holding of land to a certain number of them; those who are able to work.
31455. And the land is there ?
—And the land is there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)