Though the nation had long desired an inquiry into this barbarous affair, it was not until the 29th of April, 1695, upwards of three years after the massacre, that a commission was granted. A commission had indeed been issued in 1693 appointing the Duke of Hamilton and others to examine into the affair, but this was never acted upon. The Marquis of Tweeddale, lord high chancellor of Scotland, and the other commissioners now appointed, accordingly entered upon the inquiry, and, after examining witnesses and documents, drew up a report and transmitted it to his majesty. The commissioners appear to have executed their task, on the whole, with great fairness, although they put the very best construction on William’s orders, and threw the whole blame of the massacre upon Secretary Dalrymple.
The report of the commissioners was laid before the parliament of Scotland on the 24th of June, which decided that the execution of the Glencoe-men was a murder, resolved nemine contradicente, that the instructions contained in the warrant of the 16th January, 1692, did not authorise the massacre. After various sittings on the subject, “the committee for the security of the kingdom” was appointed to draw up an address to the king on the subject of the massacre, which being submitted to parliament on the 10th of July, was voted and approved of.
No active measures in the way of punishing either principals or subordinates, however, were taken in consequence of the findings of the commission and the recommendations of parliament, except that Breadalbane, who they found had laid himself open to a charge of high treason, was imprisoned for a few days in Edinburgh castle. A curious and interesting incident came out during the sitting of the commission, tending to show that Breadalbane was conscious of a very large share of guilt, and was fully aware of the heinous and nefarious character of the bloody transaction. Some days after the slaughter, a person sent by Breadalbane’s steward waited upon Glencoe’s sons, and told them that if they would declare that his lordship had no concern in the slaughter, they might be assured that the earl would procure their “remission and restitution.”
As the surviving Macdonalds, who on their humble petition and promise of good behaviour were allowed to return to the glen, had been reduced to great poverty and distress by the destruction of their property, and as they had conducted themselves with great moderation under their misfortunes, the estates solicited his majesty to order reparation to be made to them for the losses they had sustained in their properties. Whether the “royal charity and compassion” invoked by the estates in behalf of these unfortunate people were ever exercised does not appear; but it is highly probable, that this part of the address was as little heeded as the rest.[646] In fact, the whole matter was hushed up, and it now lives in the page of history as a sad and somewhat inexplicable blunder, which has rendered the memories of those who contrived it and those who executed it, for ever infamous.[647]
These measures of the government, conciliatory and threatening, seem to have had the effect for the time of suppressing open hostility at least among the Highlanders; but from the nature of that people, and the method in which government treated them, we can readily believe that their obedience was none of the heartiest, and that they would be glad any moment to join in an attempt to oust King William and restore King James. During the whole of William’s reign his peace of mind was being continually disturbed by rumours and discoveries of plots, and by threats of a hostile descent on this country from France. In all these the Highland chiefs had their fair share, and were ready to receive with open arms any hostile expedition which might be fortunate enough to effect a landing on their coasts.
The stirring events of the last fifty years, in which the Highlanders played a conspicuous part, appear to have been the means of drawing their attention somewhat away from their hereditary clan-quarrels, and thus rendering their destructive internal strifes less frequent. But now that there was no external outlet for their belligerent propensities, they appear again to have resumed their old clan feuds. “To be at peace, unless they were disarmed and overawed, was not in their nature; and neither the law nor the military power of the nation was then on a scale sufficient to have accomplished these ends. We even find those chiefs who had ingratiated themselves with the government, obtaining, though not so readily as formerly, the writs known by the savage name of ‘letters of fire and sword’ against their enemies. These were licenses for civil war, giving the sanction of government aid and encouragement to one side in the conflict. They authorised the favoured clan to burn, waste, and slay, far and wide, within the territory of their enemies, setting forth—such were the words of style used by the clerks of the privy council who prepared these terrible documents—‘that whatever slaughter, mutilation, blood, fire-raising, or other violence’ may be done by the persons holding the letters, shall be held ‘laudable, good, and warrantable service to his majesty and his government.’ There is little doubt that the readiness with which these warrants were issued in earlier times, arose from the view that it was a good thing to encourage the Highlanders in slaying each other, and doubtless, even for a few years after such an event as Glencoe, such a feeling would linger in the usual official quarters. Though it was professed that no one could obtain letters of fire and sword but a litigant who could not enforce his just claims, it would be generally a vain task to examine the relative merits of the two sides, expecting to find one of them in the right. Any mitigation which the horrors of such a system may have received in later times, would be from the garrison of Fort-William being associated in arms with the holders of the letters.”[648]
The materials for the internal history of the Highlands at this period are scanty; doubtless there were many petty strifes carried on between hostile clans, and many cattle-lifting raids made by the Highland borderers upon their lowland neighbours, but no records of these appear to have been kept.
Shortly after the Glencoe massacre, a scheme appears to have been proposed to the king by Breadalbane[649] for utilizing the Highlanders “in case of any insurrection at home, or invasion from abroad.” The gist of it was that the Highland chiefs should be ordered to raise a body of 4,000 men, who would be so disciplined that they would be ready to be called out when required, and who were to be commanded by “some principal man in the Highlands,” who would have the pay of a general officer. This “principal man,” Breadalbane doubtless meant to be himself, as he suggests that the second in command should be Lochiel, who he said was ambitious to serve his majesty, and was a Protestant. Forty subordinate officers were to be appointed, Breadalbane wisely suggesting that these should be of Highland extraction, and that the soldiers themselves should be allowed to use their own apparel, their own arms, and to be disciplined after their own fashion. As will be afterwards seen, government appears to have acted on this or some similar proposal, and organized a few independent Highland companies. We give below the number of men which, according to Breadalbane’s estimate, each of the chiefs to which the proposal referred could raise. It is probably considerably below the number of men capable of bearing arms, who were at the command of the various chiefs named.[650]
It is about this time that the famous Robert Macgregor, better known as Rob Roy, first emerges into notice. The details of his life will be found in the account of the Clan Macgregor, in Part Second of this work.