THE PORTEOUS MOB.
In the precedingCHAPTERs (I. to VI.) the circumstances of thatextraordinary riot and conspiracy, called the Porteous Mob, are givenwith as much accuracy as the author was able to collect them. The order,regularity, and determined resolution with which such a violent actionwas devised and executed, were only equalled by the secrecy which wasobserved concerning the principal actors.
Although the fact was performed by torch-light, and in presence of agreat multitude, to some of whom, at least, the individual actors musthave been known, yet no discovery was ever made concerning any of theperpetrators of the slaughter.
Two men only were brought to trial for an offence which the Governmentwere so anxious to detect and punish. William M'Lauchlan, footman to theCountess of Wemyss, who is mentioned in the report of theSolicitor-General, against whom strong evidence had been obtained, wasbrought to trial in March 1737, charged as having been accessory to theriot, armed with a Lochaber axe. But this man (who was at all times asilly creature) proved, that he was in a state of mortal intoxicationduring the time he was present with the rabble, incapable of giving themeither advice or assistance, or, indeed, of knowing what he or they weredoing. He was also able to prove, that he was forced into the riot, andupheld while there by two bakers, who put a Lochaber axe into his hand.The jury, wisely judging this poor creature could be no proper subject ofpunishment, found the panel Not Guilty. The same verdict was given in thecase of Thomas Linning, also mentioned in the Solicitor's memorial, whowas tried in 1738. In short, neither then, nor for a long periodafterwards, was anything discovered relating to the organisation of thePorteous Plot.
The imagination of the people of Edinburgh was long irritated, and theircuriosity kept awake, by the mystery attending this extraordinaryconspiracy. It was generally reported of such natives of Edinburgh as,having left the city in youth, returned with a fortune amassed in foreigncountries, that they had originally fled on account of their share in thePorteous Mob. But little credit can be attached to these surmises, as inmost of the cases they are contradicted by dates, and in none supportedby anything but vague rumours, grounded on the ordinary wish of thevulgar, to impute the success of prosperous men to some unpleasantsource. The secret history of the Porteous Mob has been till this dayunravelled; and it has always been quoted as a close, daring, andcalculated act of violence, of a nature peculiarly characteristic of theScottish people.
Nevertheless, the author, for a considerable time, nourished hopes tohave found himself enabled to throw some light on this mysterious story.An old man, who died about twenty years ago, at the advanced age ofninety-three, was said to have made a communication to the clergyman whoattended upon his death-bed, respecting the origin of the Porteous Mob.This person followed the trade of a carpenter, and had been employed assuch on the estate of a family of opulence and condition. His characterin his line of life and amongst his neighbours, was excellent, and neverunderwent the slightest suspicion. His confession was said to have beento the following purpose: That he was one of twelve young men belongingto the village of Pathhead, whose animosity against Porteous, on accountof the execution of Wilson, was so extreme, that they resolved to executevengeance on him with their own hands, rather than he should escapepunishment. With this resolution they crossed the Forth at differentferries, and rendezvoused at the suburb called Portsburgh, where theirappearance in a body soon called numbers around them. The public mind wasin such a state of irritation, that it only wanted a single spark tocreate an explosion; and this was afforded by the exertions of the smalland determined band of associates. The appearance of premeditation andorder which distinguished the riot, according to his account, had itsorigin, not in any previous plan or conspiracy, but in the character ofthose who were engaged in it. The story also serves to show why nothingof the origin of the riot has ever been discovered, since though initself a great conflagration, its source, according to this account, wasfrom an obscure and apparently inadequate cause.
I have been disappointed, however, in obtaining the evidence on whichthis story rests. The present proprietor of the estate on which the oldman died (a particular friend of the author) undertook to question theson of the deceased on the subject. This person follows his father'strade, and holds the employment of carpenter to the same family. Headmits that his father's going abroad at the time of the Porteous Mob waspopularly attributed to his having been concerned in that affair; butadds that, so far as is known to him, the old man had never made anyconfession to that effect; and, on the contrary, had uniformly deniedbeing present. My kind friend, therefore, had recourse to a person fromwhom he had formerly heard the story; but who, either from respect to anold friend's memory, or from failure of his own, happened to haveforgotten that ever such a communication was made. So my obligingcorrespondent (who is a fox-hunter) wrote to me that he was completely_planted;_ and all that can be said with respect to the tradition is,that it certainly once existed, and was generally believed.
[_N.B._--The Rev. Dr. Carlyle, minister of Inveresk, in his_Autobiography,_ gives some interesting particulars relating to thePorteous Mob, from personal recollections. He happened to be present inthe Tolbooth Church when Robertson made his escape, and also at theexecution of Wilson in the Grassmarket, when Captain Porteous fired uponthe mob, and several persons were killed. Edinburgh 1860, 8vo, pp.30-42.]