ROBERT FLEMING GOURLAY,
THE "BANISHED BRITON."
A few years before his death Mr. Gourlay issued the prospectus of a work bearing the following title: "The Recorded Life of Robert Gourlay, Esq., now Robert Fleming Gourlay, with Reminiscences and Reflections, by himself, in his 75th year." So far as we have been able to ascertain, no portion of the projected work has ever been given to the world; and we may add that nothing like a consecutive account of the life of one of the most remarkable men known to the early political history of Upper Canada has ever been attempted. Any account written at this distance of time, and without access to Mr. Gourlay's family papers, must necessarily be somewhat fragmentary and disconnected. During his lifetime he published several volumes and numerous pamphlets, all of which throw more or less light on certain episodes in his career; but the writer who undertakes to separate the wheat from the chaff, and to weave into a harmonious narrative the rambling, discursive, and often incoherent literary productions of this singular man, will find that he has no sinecure on his hands. It is desirable, however, that the attempt should be made, for Robert Gourlay exercised no slight influence upon Upper Canadian politics sixty-and-odd years ago, and the accounts of him contained in the various histories of Canada are wofully meagre and unsatisfactory. His life is interesting in itself, and instructive by way of an example to egotists for all time to come. It presents the spectacle of a man of good abilities and upright intentions, who spent the greater part of a long life in endeavouring to benefit his fellow-creatures, and who nevertheless, owing to the peculiar idiosyncrasies of his character, was foredoomed to disappointment and misfortune almost from his birth. "Robert," said his father, "will hurt himself, but will do good to others." This judgment was passed when Robert was a boy at school, and his subsequent career fully vindicated the accuracy of the paternal estimate.
Robert Gourlay—who when past middle life assumed the name of Robert Fleming Gourlay—was a native of the parish of Ceres, in Fifeshire, Scotland, and was born there on the 24th of March, 1778. He came of respectable ancestry. His father, a man of liberal education, had studied law, and practised for thirteen years as a Writer to the Signet in Edinburgh; and before the birth of his son, the subject of this sketch, had become the possessor, by marriage, descent, and otherwise, of considerable landed property. Soon after Robert's birth the old gentleman retired from the practice of his profession, and settled upon one of his estates, in the parish of Ceres, where he devoted much of his time to devising and carrying out various agricultural improvements. He also expended large sums of money in improving and beautifying the highways in his parish, and in contributing to the comfort and happiness of his poorer neighbours. His real estates were worth at least £100,000 sterling, and he had a floating capital of about £20,000. Robert received an education commensurate with his station in life. After being taught by several private tutors, he was placed at the High School of Edinburgh. He was also for a short time at the University of St. Andrews, where he was a contemporary and warm personal friend of Thomas (afterwards Doctor) Chalmers. The Doctor has left written testimony to the capacity and moral worth of his fellow-pupil. The latter also seems to have spent a term at the University of Edinburgh. Owing to his being the eldest son, and born to considerable expectations, he was not bred to any regular profession, and his life for some years after leaving school seems to have been passed in a somewhat desultory fashion. He lived at home, and was on visiting terms with the resident gentry of Fifeshire. He took some interest in military matters, and in October, 1799, received a commission to command a corps of the Fifeshire Volunteers. This commission appears to have lapsed, for, when war was declared by Great Britain against Bonaparte in 1803, we find Robert Gourlay volunteering as a private in a troop of yeomanry cavalry. The services of the troop, however, were not required, and, regarding this as a slight to the troop and himself, he withdrew his name from the muster-roll in high dudgeon. In 1806 he was again seized with military ardour, and offered his services to take charge of a military corps and invade Paris, during Bonaparte's absence in Poland. He at this time evidently possessed an energetic, but unpractical and ill-balanced mind, which may have been to some extent due to the nature of his training, but was doubtless chiefly a matter of inherited temperament. Like his father, he was very kind and generous to the poor of Ceres and the neighbouring parishes, and spent much time in making himself familiar with their needs and sympathies. By the lower orders he was greatly beloved, and with reason, for he was actuated by a sincere philanthropy, and contributed largely to the improvement of their condition. He studied the economical side of the poor question with great diligence, and was recognized as an authority on all matters relating to parish rates, tithes, visiting justice business, and pauperism generally. These studies brought him into contact with Mr. Arthur Young, the eminent writer on agricultural questions, whose "Travels in France during the years 1787, '88, '89 and '90," is the most trustworthy source of information regarding the condition of that country just before the breaking out of the Revolution. Mr. Young formed a high estimate of Gourlay, and, at his suggestion, the latter was appointed by a branch of the Government to conduct an inquiry into the state of the poor in England. Mr. Gourlay travelled, chiefly on foot, through the greater part of the chief agricultural districts of England and Scotland, and when he had brought his inquiries to an end, he was pronounced by Mr. Young to be better informed with respect to the poor of Great Britain than any other man in the kingdom. He was consulted by members of Parliament, political economists, parish overseers, and even by members of the Cabinet, as to the best means for reforming the poor laws, and was always ready to spend himself and his substance for the public good.
In 1807 he married, and settled down at Pratis, one of his father's estates in Fifeshire. He had only been thus settled a few months when he got into a quarrel with his neighbour, the Earl of Kellie. The cause of quarrel seems ludicrously small to have produced such results as ensued. Lord Kellie was Chairman of a meeting of heritors held at Cupar on the 15th of February, 1808. The object of the meeting was to pass a loyal address to the King, and to discuss certain details respecting the farmers' income-tax. The address was duly voted, after which it was proposed to adjourn the discussion on the income-tax question until a future day. Mr. Gourlay, who was present, opposed this adjournment with much vehemence. While he was making a speech, in favour of proceeding with the discussion without delay, the Chairman, Lord Kellie, pronounced the meeting adjourned, and vacated his chair. This action Mr. Gourlay construed into a personal insult to himself. He and Lord Kellie were diametrically opposed to each other in their views on this income-tax question, and Mr. Gourlay considered that the Earl had taken an unfair advantage of his position in order to stave off discussion. In this view he was probably borne out by the fact. There can be no question, however, that his anger was altogether out of proportion to the offence. He wrote to Lord Kellie demanding an apology. The demand not being complied with he devoted a fortnight to writing his "Letter to the Earl of Kellie concerning the Farmers' Income Tax, with a hint on the principle of representation, &c. &c." This letter, which occupies sixty-three printed octavo pages, was published in London, at the author's expense, and circulated throughout the county of Fife. Mr. Gourlay's argument on the main question was sound enough, but it could have been stated effectively in two or three pages, instead of in more than twenty times that number. The pamphlet diverged into all sorts of extraneous matters, and was full of personal abuse of Lord Kellie. It did Mr. Gourlay no good in the county, even with the farmers whose cause he espoused, and from this time forward we perceive in all his writings the most unmistakable evidences of an irritated mind, and a temper under very inadequate control.
His health having temporarily given way, he determined to try change of climate, and in the course of the year 1809 he took up his abode in England, as tenant of Deptford Farm, in the parish of Wily, in Wiltshire, an estate belonging to the Duke of Somerset. His Grace had expressed himself as being very desirous of improving the condition of the English farming community, and had for several years made pressing overtures to Mr. Gourlay to settle in Wiltshire, and to give him the benefit of his knowledge and experience. There can be no doubt that Mr. Gourlay was actuated at least as much by philanthropy as by selfish motives in becoming the Duke's tenant. It may be said, indeed, that throughout the whole of his life he was singularly indifferent to mere gain. He had a bee in his bonnet which was constantly stinging him to set himself up in opposition to those in authority, but he was thoroughly honest in his views, and would suffer any trial or indignity rather than sacrifice what he regarded as a righteous principle. In his inability to see any side of a question but his own, he was undoubtedly a consummate egotist, but his egotism was of the intellect only, and a more honourable and single-minded man in all his pecuniary transactions never lived. In almost every battle which he fought with the world he had right on his side, but he had the unfortunate faculty of always putting himself in the wrong. He was critical without discrimination, and though naturally frank and open in his disposition, was morbidly suspicious of the motives of others. He was also infected by an itch for notoriety. It was sweet to him to know that people were talking about him, even if they were speaking to his disadvantage. He was often guided by petulance and passion; seldom or never by sober judgment. His mission in life seemed to be that of a grievance-monger, and no occupation was so gratifying to him as the hunting-up and exposure of abuses. Had his just and liberal principles been allied to a calm intellect and a patient temper, he would have accomplished much good for his fellow-creatures, and might have lived a happy and useful life. But his cantankerous temper and irritable nerves were constantly placing him at a disadvantage. He had not been long settled at Deptford Farm ere he began to agitate for a reform of the poor-laws. It was no secret that the poor-laws were in a most unsatisfactory state, and needed reformation, but Mr. Gourlay's method of advocacy was ill calculated either to produce the desired end or to elevate him in public esteem. He wrote column after column in the form of letters to the local newspapers, in which the most sweeping and impracticable measures were suggested as proper subjects for legislation, and in which the magnates of the county of Wilts were referred to in the most violent and opprobrious language. When the papers refused to publish his communications any longer he issued them in pamphlet form, and circulated them broadcast through the land at his own expense. He got together considerable bodies of the labouring classes, and harangued them with scurrilous volubility about the oppressions to which they were subjected by the "landed oligarchy." He declaimed violently against the Government, which permitted such "reptiles" to "grind the faces of God's poor." He drew up petition after petition to Parliament, in which the landlords were denounced as tyrants, bloodsuckers, and monsters of selfish greed.
This course of procedure could have but one result. It influenced the poor against their landlords, who looked upon Gourlay as a visionary and mischievous demagogue. The Duke of Somerset's ardour for improving the condition of his tenants suddenly cooled, and he began to regret that he had imported this pestilent Scotchman, whom he stigmatized as a "republican firebrand," into the hitherto quiet vales of Wiltshire. The pestilent Scotchman, however, had an agreement for a lease of his farm for twenty-one years, drawn up by the Duke's own solicitor, and had expended several thousands of pounds in improvements and farm-stock. He had faithfully performed all the conditions on his part, and his farm was a model throughout the county. He gained premiums from various agricultural societies for the best ploughing and the best crops. No matter; it was necessary that he should be got rid of, at any cost. A cunning solicitor found a pretext for filing a bill in Chancery against him, and he was thus involved in a protracted and ruinous litigation, whereby it was sought to avoid the agreement on certain technical grounds into which it is unnecessary to enter. After much delay a decree was pronounced in his favour; whereupon he filed a bill against the Duke for specific performance of the agreement. This occasioned further delay and expense, for the Duke's solicitors fought every inch of ground, and resorted to every conceivable means to embarrass the plaintiff. When the suit was finally decided in the latter's favour, he was a ruined man. His farming operations had never been profitable, for his object had been to carry on a model farm rather than to make money. The lawsuits had been attended with great expense, his mode of living had been suited to his condition and expectations, and his charities to the poor had been abundant. Worse, however, remained behind. His father had become bankrupt, and his own expectations of succeeding to an ample fortune were at an end.