‘John Falkirk,’ it has already been mentioned, was a cognomen used by Graham; and Motherwell has noted that, in an edition of the Cariches published after Graham’s death, there was prefixed an ‘Account of John Falkirk, the Scots Piper.’ The only early edition we have seen is one printed by C. Randall, Stirling. It is undated, but was probably printed about 1807, and consists of eight pages. So far as it goes it does not materially differ from the modern editions, but it is without forty questions and answers which appear in them. It is probable that, out of the general rule, the modern editions are more complete than the one published by Randall. On the title-page of the Stirling chap-book is a rough wood-cut of a blind beggar led by a dog, presumably designed as a frontispiece for an English chap, entitled, ‘The Blind Beggar of Bethnal Green,’ very popular south of the Tweed, and occasionally printed in Scotland. Motherwell’s edition of John Falkirk was published in Glasgow in 1779, but his copy of the Cariches was undated.
The Comical Sayings of Pady from Cork is the title of a chap-book attributed to Graham by Motherwell and all his successors. Unlike the bellman’s other works it does not deal with any phase of Scottish life, but rather with the vagaries popularly believed for many generations to be characteristic of the Irish mind. It is, in fact, a collection of the proverbial Irish ‘bulls,’ some of them ‘comical’ and spontaneous, but others studied and consequently stupid. In many respects the dialogue between Pady and his English interlocutor, Tom, is clever, but frequently it is evident that the author was out of his element. It must be confessed that there is a good deal of force in Professor Fraser’s argument, so far as Pady from Cork is concerned, that there was not a single sentence in it which might not have been written by any one other than Graham, and that most of the incidents narrated in it were to be found in the facetiæ of almost every country in Europe long before Graham carried a pack or rang the skellat bell of Glasgow.[26] Mr. Fraser refers in these remarks in the first instance to George Buchanan and The History of Buckhaven, but he applies them to Pady from Cork, with the modification that it was less of a compilation and had more local colouring than the chap-books he had been discussing. But while all that may be true enough, Motherwell’s authority in attributing the authorship of Pady from Cork to Dougal Graham cannot well be impugned, for on this point he apparently writes under the inspiration of his friend Mr. Caldwell; and it is notable that the copy in the possession of Motherwell was published by Caldwell in 1784. The edition reprinted from in this collection was published in Glasgow by J. & M. Robertson in 1807, and on the title-page there is a wood-cut showing a military looking gentleman standing beside a small cannon. The modern editions are considerably mutilated, and, among other things, want the ‘Creed for Romish Believers,’ to be found in earlier copies. ‘Pady’s New Catechism’ and his ‘Creed’ have been mentioned in a preceding page as being in the third number of a very rare edition of Lothian Tom, to all appearance only as padding.
Motherwell and M‘Vean both attributed the authorship of Simple John and his Twelve Misfortunes to Dougal Graham; but Professor Fraser, on the other hand, has brought a distinct charge of plagiarism against the poetical bellman. ‘The original hero of the “Misfortunes,”’ he says, ‘is Simple Simon; a history of whose life and misadventures was common in England in the seventeenth century. This, or a similar version—most likely one of the many editions issued from Newcastle—Graham most certainly stole, and, having changed the hero’s name to John, and written a racy introduction to the work in broad Scotch, gave it to the world as an original production. The prefatory matter is quite in Graham’s style, and could not have been written by an Englishman. It is frequently to be found published separately under the title of Silly Tam.’[27] But before going into the question here raised, it may be as well to state that the edition from which Simple John has been reprinted in this collection, is one published in Glasgow in 1780, and ‘Printed for the Company of Flying Stationers in Town and Country.’ The original is a duodecimo, and consists of eight closely printed pages, with a wood-cut on the title-page, representing the unfortunate husband running from his wife, who pursues him with outstretched arms, while his haste is emphasised by his hat and wig being shown as falling from his head to the ground. The other editions now lying before the editor are—1st, one printed in Edinburgh, in 1821, ‘for the booksellers,’ of twenty-four pages duodecimo; and another almost identical in every way, the print being nearly line for line the same, bearing the imprint—‘Edinburgh: Printed for the Booksellers, 1823.’ Both these editions have, as a frontispiece, the picture of a hook-nosed termagant, giving a simple looking fellow, with a beer-mug in his hand, a severe shaking. The matter in the modern undated edition, ‘printed for the booksellers’ in Glasgow, is the same, with one or two slight differences, as what is to be found in the older ones already enumerated. But, in addition to these, there also lies before us a copy of The Miseries of Poor Simple Innocent Tam, which, like one mentioned by Professor Fraser, is of eight pages duodecimo, without covers, and gives no indication of date or place of issue. With the exception of the alteration of the name of the hero from ‘John’ to ‘Tam,’ the text is exactly the same as that contained in the introduction to Simple John. An undated edition, of eight pages, of Simple John was printed by William Cameron, in Edinburgh. It only contains the introductory matter, and concludes with the addition of John’s lament on the death of his mother, without making further reference to his misfortunes. Having thus detailed the several editions of what has generally been regarded as Graham’s chap-book, in its two-fold form of Simple John and Simple Tam, some attention may now be paid to Professor Fraser’s allegations against the literary morality of the reputed author. After a careful comparison of the English chap-book, Simple Simon, with Simple John, we cannot but admit the statement that ‘the prefatory matter is quite in Graham’s style, and could not have been written by an Englishman;’ but we are not prepared to admit that Graham ‘most certainly stole’ the main body of the work. What Professor Fraser assumes to have been stolen must have been, though he does not explicitly say so, the ‘Twelve Misfortunes,’ for he admits that the preface is original and Scotch. This conclusion seems to have been come to without careful collation. Any one who has the opportunity, and will take the trouble to collate the two works, will find that only in two instances do the misfortunes in the Scotch chap-book bear any resemblance to those described in its English counterpart. These two instances are the fourth and seventh misfortunes in Simple John; but though the general features are the same, there is a great difference in the mode of treatment. As for the other misfortunes that befell Simple John, they have not even counterparts in Simple Simon, and, indeed, they could not well have, for they are almost entirely Scotch in their nature. Again, the conclusions arrived at in the two books are different. Simple Simon endeavours to poison himself, but by mistake he takes a draught from his wife’s bottle of sack, becomes drunk, and is cudgelled in consequence, but he and his wife afterwards lead a happy life. No such good fortune attends Simple John, for he laments his unhappy fate, and ‘appeals to a Jedburgh jury, if it be not easier to deal wi’ fools than headstrong, fashious fouks; owns he has but an empty scull, but his wicked wife wants wit to pour judgment into it, never tells him o’ danger till it comes upon him, for his mither said he was a bidable bairn, if onybody had been to learn him wit.’ We cannot, therefore, concur in Mr. Fraser’s statement that Graham ‘stole’ this chap-book, ‘and gave it to the world as an original production.’ For the reasons shown, we believe Graham only took the idea—and it may be gravely questioned if he did so much, for it has yet to be proved that Simple Simon was ‘common in England in the seventeenth century,’[28]—from the English chap-book, and worked it out in a manner peculiarly his own, and, it must also be added, distinctively Scotch.
In the case of another chap-book usually believed to owe its existence to Dougal Graham, Professor Fraser has seen fit to go against the general verdict, without, as it seems to us, giving a sufficient reason for the position he has taken up. He considers it extremely improbable, judging from internal evidence, that Graham ever composed the History of Buckhaven; and, further on, referring to it and The Witty Exploits of George Buchanan, he says, ‘There is not a single sentence in either of them that might not have been written by any one else.’ The latter remark may be all very true, but the former one must involve a serious difference of opinion. It would indeed be difficult to say what internal evidence is to be found in the History of Buckhaven that gave good reason for the assumption that Graham was not its author. Motherwell, judging apparently on this ‘internal evidence,’ says that, although he had not authority for ascribing any popular chap-books to Graham other than those he had mentioned, he would not be surprised to find that Graham was also the author of this history. M‘Vean, without comment, gives the work a place in his bibliography of Graham’s works, and it is to be presumed that a man of his undoubted attainments as a literary antiquary would not have done so without some reason satisfactory at least to himself. For our own part, we see nothing in the work itself at all inconsistent with the idea that Graham may have been the author of it. On the contrary, there seem to be some points in the course of the narrative which strongly support the commonly accepted tradition. That Graham possessed an undoubted acquaintance with the western district of Fifeshire, in which the respectable town of Buckhaven is situated, is evident from Jockey and Maggy’s Courtship, the scene of which is laid in the vicinity of Torryburn; and his intimate knowledge of Fifeshire modes of speech is further shown by an amusing character he introduced into The Coalman’s Courtship—‘auld Mattie, the Fife wife ... the wife it says, Be-go laddie.’ The language used in the History of Buckhaven, the style of treatment, and the burlesque humour, all bespeak Dougal as its author, for they are similar in all important points to what are to be found in works which even Mr. Fraser has without hesitation assented to being ascribed to Graham. The history, of course, is a burlesque, after the style of a well-known English chap-book, The Wise Men of Gotham, which it far outstrips for cleverness and racy humour. It has, however, the taint common to so many of Dougal’s works. The whole motive may be summed up in a short quotation from one of the many defunct Glasgow magazines:—‘The Buckhaven people, originally foreign colonists, were a people on the Fife side of the Forth, who lived much by themselves, had singular manners, and were of uncouth speech. All kinds of absurdities could thus be safely palmed upon them.’[29] Messrs. J. & M. Robertson, Saltmarket, issued a 24 pp. edition of the History of Buckhaven in 1806, illustrated by some very rude woodcuts, most of them having done duty in other chap-books. This edition is in three parts; and the title-page bears that the work was written by ‘Merry Andrew at Tamtallon.’ The more modern issues only contain the first two parts, and even these are considerably abridged.
The last work attributed to Dougal Graham, and calling for any detailed notice in this place, is the one entitled The History and Entertaining Exploits of George Buchanan, who was commonly called the King’s Fool. It is a chap-book which has been long popular, and one which has given rise to a variety of speculations, not only as to its authorship but also as to who was really the person whose ‘exploits’ are professedly recorded in its pages. As to the first of these points, Motherwell said he would not be surprised if Graham were its author; and M‘Vean heads his list of Dougal’s works with it. Fraser, on the other hand, argues against it being the composition of Graham, the ground he takes up being the same as that already quoted in relation to The History of Buckhaven and Simple John. In this instance, however, we think he has a stronger case than he had against Graham’s authorship of the two other publications. The internal evidence of the work itself—the time at which George Buchanan is shown to have lived—is sufficient proof that in it Graham could not in any sense lay claim to originality. But at the same time it is more than probable that he brought together the stories told about the country regarding his hero, and for the first time gave them forth to the world in a collected form. Until some additional light can be shed upon this matter, dogmatism either on the one side or the other would be imprudent; but, while sympathising to some extent with the position taken up by Professor Fraser, we do not see our way clear to dissent from the tradition of Graham’s connection with the chap-book. The idea that he may have been its editor, or compiler, appears to be quite reasonable.
The next question, as to the identity of the hero of The Merry Exploits of George Buchanan, is one upon which a more definite opinion can be expressed, though it has given rise to several curious notions. The idea most common at the present day among the mass of the Scottish people is that there were two Scotsmen who bore the name of George Buchanan, one of them being the King’s fool, and the other the eminent Latinist, historian, and poet. This theory, it must be confessed, is the one which does the most credit to the scholar, but we are afraid it does not do justice to the fact. There can be no doubt, from many of the stories given in the chap-book, that George Buchanan, the scholar, is the person pointed at; and a careful consideration of his life and opinions, viewed in the light in which these were regarded by many of his contemporaries and immediate successors, will readily furnish the origin of the extraordinary actions attributed to him. We must not, however, be understood to give countenance to another impression, by no means uncommon among a certain class, that George Buchanan acted as the King’s buffoon or fool. The life of the historian of Scotland was cast in a troublous age. Born in the year 1506, he was an active participant in the turmoil of the Reformation period, and had a large share in the proceedings against the unfortunate Queen Mary. Like most of the reformers his nature was stiff and unbending, but he possessed a dry and caustic wit which made him valuable to his friends and more and more hated by his enemies. His opponents took every opportunity to vilify his character, and spread abroad by means of books and conversations, after his death, even by Acts of the Scottish Estates, aspersions on his life and opinions. To show how this was done, one or two instances may be given. A French priest named Garasse, in a work entitled Doctrine Curieuse,—an edition of which was published in 1590, a few years after Buchanan’s death—speaks of that illustrious man as a ‘hard drinker.’ After endeavouring to show how his whole life had been one of continual debauchery, Garasse proceeds with his shameless libel, and makes Buchanan say on his death-bed, in answer to the remonstrances of his doctors:—‘“Go along with you, you and your prescriptions and dietaries! I would far rather live only three jolly weeks, getting comfortably drunk every day, than live six dreary wineless years.” ... He died in brief space, however; his chamber being then rarely littered with glasses and wine-measures.’ In his native country, also, his memory was abused. His death in 1582 was little noticed, but it was soon followed by an outburst against his writings. His works have long been regarded as valuable in spite of the many defects they admittedly have; but the Scottish Estates, in 1584, issued an order for their purgation because they contained ‘sundrie offensive matters, worthie to be detecte,’ because of their ‘steiring up his hienes subjectes theirby to misliking sedition unquietness, and to cast off their due obedience to his Majestie.’ Heylin, in his Cosmographie, said Buchanan’s History of Scotland and De Jure Regni had ‘wrought more mischief in the world than all Machiavel’s works’; and the authorities of the University of Oxford, in 1683, publicly burned the political works of George Buchanan, along with others equally obnoxious to them. These few incidents, among many, are sufficient to indicate how the extraordinary stories told in the chap-book came to be attached to George Buchanan, one of the most learned and cultured men of his time. There is good ground for the remark that the Merry Exploits of George Buchanan ‘is a terrible libel on an eminent man; never was mental greatness so “let down” in the popular estimation as by this vulgar performance; by and through which Buchanan’s humble countrymen were taught, not to look up to him, but down upon him as a coarse buffoon.’[30] It must be admitted, however, that there is strong reason to suspect that many of the stories were current before the issue of the chap-book, but it, of course, would help to perpetuate the libels. The conclusion from what has been said may be thus briefly summarised. Dougal Graham seems to have been the collector of ridiculous stories about George Buchanan, the scholar and historian, these stories being, for the most part, manifestly untrue, but the natural offspring of the more elaborate libels written and spoken against him immediately after his death.
Many editions of this chap-book have been published, and it promises to have the longest life of any of its race, for it is still being issued. The copy reprinted in this work was published in Falkirk in 1799. Among the other editions we have seen are the following:—One issued in Edinburgh bears ‘to be printed in this present year,’ a somewhat indefinite intimation, consisting of 47 duodecimo pages; and one in two numbers of 24 pp. each, printed in Newcastle by G. Angus, without date, and apparently complete. The earliest edition mentioned is one published by A. Robertson, Coalhill, Leith, in 1765. It was an octavo, in six parts of eight pages each, with a title-page to each part. Another was printed by W. R. Walker, Royal Arcade, Newcastle-on-Tyne, but it bears no date. The Robertsons, of the Saltmarket, Glasgow, also issued several editions of this chap-book, among the rest of their ‘Standards.’
Having thus gone over, with as much detail as possible, the various works attributed to Dougal Graham, it will be proper to give the list of them, with the dates of the editions reprinted in these volumes:—
1.—The History of the Rebellion, 3rd Edition. Glasgow, 1774.
2.—John Hielandman’s Remarks on Glasgow, n.d.
3.—Turnimspike, n.d.
4.—Tugal M‘Tagger, n.d.
5.—Had awa’ frae me, Donald, n.d.
6.—Jockey and Maggy’s Courtship. Glasgow, 1779.
7.—The Coalman’s Courtship. Glasgow, 1782.
8.—Lothian Tom. Edinburgh, 1775.
9.—John Cheap the Chapman. Falkirk, 1798.
10.—Leper the Taylor. Stirling, 1799.
11.—The Taylor’s Funeral. 1816.
12.—Haverel Wives. Glasgow, 1781.
13.—Janet Clinker’s Oration. Glasgow, 1807.
14.—The Witty Jokes of John Falkirk. Edinburgh, 1777.
15.—John Falkirk’s Cariches. Stirling, n.d.
16.—Pady from Cork. Glasgow, 1807.
17.—Simple John, alias Simple Tam. Glasgow, 1780.
18.—History of Buckhaven. Glasgow, 1806.
19.—George Buchanan. Stirling, 1795.