MONTROSE 160 TEARS AGO: 
 
 BftlNtt A 
 
 NOTICE OF CERTAIN MANUSCRIPT PAPERS FOUND 
 IN THE WALL OF AN OLD HOUSE 
 IN THE SHORE WYND IN SEPTEMBER, 1887, 
 
 THOSE: PRINTED 1*Y J. & CL P-MACASKIE, IIIOII STREET. 
 
MONTROSE 160 YEARS AGO 
 
 BEING A 
 
 NOTICE OE CERTAIN MANUSCRIPT PAPERS POUND 
 IN THE WALL OP AN OLD HOUSE 
 IN THE SHORE WYND IN SEPTEMBER, 1887, 
 
 BY 
 
 JAMES CAMERON. 
 
 PRINTED BY J. A C. B. MAO ASK IE, HIGH STREET. 
 
C 
 
 MONTEOSE 160 YEARS AGO. 
 
 The papers found on the occasion of alterations 
 being made in an old house in Shore Wynd (Sept., 
 1887) consist chiefly of signed receipts and discharged 
 accounts relative to the affairs of two ship captains, 
 Alexander Stevenson and William Beattie, the re¬ 
 mainder being documents of a legal nature and not 
 immediately concerning either. Considering the 
 lengthened period of their concealment they are, 
 though browned with age and stained with damp, in 
 a remarkably well-preserved state ; and few of them, 
 unless where defective, give much trouble to the 
 decipherer. Among the collection there are many 
 excellent specimens of the penmanship of those days, 
 whose execution would not disgrace a teacher of the 
 art, and if the spelling is somewhat peculiar it is in 
 such examples always self consistent and free from 
 the blotches and blunders of ignorance and careless¬ 
 ness, or the headlong haste and distracting worry of 
 the progressive times in which we live. And if 
 individual character may be inferred from individual 
 handwriting, we might predicate of that generation 
 from these long-lived relics of its own handiwork that 
 it was sensible and prudent, capable and conscientious. 
 
 Stevenson’s papers range in date from 1716 to 
 1729 ; Beattie’s from 1730 to 1736 ; and as the one 
 comes into view just when the other has disappeared, 
 it is reasonable to suppose that the one succeeded the 
 other in the command of the same vessel, though 
 there is no direct evidence bearing upon the point. 
 
 The master mariner of last century was apparently 
 something more than a mere carrier of other men’s 
 merchandise. From their accounts it is evident that 
 both of these worthies entered largely into business 
 on their own account, and their respective spouses 
 were seemingly as managing and competent as them¬ 
 selves, their home trade being necessarily almost 
 entirely under the control of the wives. It was in 
 both cases a sort of dual partnership, the husband 
 
( 2 ) 
 
 Foaming over the sea in the service of employers iw 
 doubt, but still with some private means of his ow® 
 and the best opportunity of making a profitable 
 investment of them ? whilst his better half was im¬ 
 proving the periods of his absence in dispensing th© 
 utilities and luxuries of life to the community around 
 lber with all the advantages of a privileged importer. 
 It may easily be inferred that such a mode of living 
 was lucrative. A career of ten years would enable a 
 skilful and prudent captain, if only he were so fortu¬ 
 nate as to escape the disasters incident to his pro¬ 
 fession—and they were much more serious then than 
 mow—to retire from active life in comparative afflu¬ 
 ence. Such being the case, it is evident also that 
 persons of good family would be attracted to it. 
 Stevenson himself, there is some reason to believe, 
 was very respectably connected. In one of the law 
 papers in the collection mention is made of a name¬ 
 sake, Alexander Stevenson of Montgreenan, a writer 
 to the Signet—probably a near relative. A young 
 Carmegy whose father was, judging from an epistle of 
 his, a gentleman of position in the neighbourhood, 
 was apprentice to the seafaring business under Capt. 
 William Ouchterlony, himself a member of a very 
 respectable and indeed ancient family, as sundry 
 noteworthy tombs in our local graveyards show, if 
 such evidence were needed ; and not to multiply 
 instances, “Androu Scott Tf of Usaa was another 
 honest skiper ” of familiar name and fame, though 
 he belonged to a generation still earlier than that 
 with which we are more immediately concerned. Of 
 Beattie's family connections there is nothing to report 
 beyond the fact that his cousin, Hobert Beattie, was 
 Bean of Guild in 1730, as is shown in a receipt given 
 to the Captain for the dues paid by the latter on his 
 being made a “Burgher." 
 
 Stevenson appears first as captain of the Hopeful! 
 Jean ”—a homely and pleasant name, and—no smal! 
 matter—one which would help—such is the subtle 
 influence of names on sailors and soldiers alike, and 
 on mankind generally, to attach her crew to their 
 vessel. Who the particular lady thus complimented 
 may have been is, to day at least, a very small matter ; 
 but as it had been no small one to somebody, we may 
 indulge in a little speculation as its origin. The ship 
 was owned by five persons conjointly, two of whom, 
 named Millar, owning between them three-fourths of 
 the whole, the remaining shares being held by James 
 
i * ) 
 
 Eayail, Robert Peattrie, and Robert Taylor, Now 
 there is a Jean Millar who figures prominently in 
 these accounts as an inn-keeper, or vintner probably, 
 not, however, as wife of either of these principal 
 owners, for she was a Mrs Christie, but in all likeli¬ 
 hood as a sister of theirs, and in fine she may have 
 been the “ original and only genuine” Hopefull Jean 
 of whom we are in search. Herein she manifests a 
 pleasure and a pride in her birth name, and a deter¬ 
 mination to stick to it in spite of marriage, and there 
 is no way of accounting for so remarkable a peculiarity 
 except such a connection with prominent citkens of 
 the day as we have indicated. 
 
 There is no note in these papers of the tonnage of 
 the vessel or the number of her crew, but we may 
 gather some information regarding the provisions 
 supplied to her and the nature and extent of the trade 
 in whichshewasengaged. Froman aocountdated2.72@ 
 we make a -discovery of rather a singular nature. The 
 item alluded to runs as follows:— <4 To a barle of 
 herrings for beef to the ship, £9,” the money of 
 course Scots, and e^ual to 15s sterling, or “starling,” 
 as the accounts invariably have it when it occurs at 
 all. From another we have—“To butter, kell, and 
 ether small things.” From another—“To ship’s 
 brid, beaken, and header/’—the “ brid ” being 
 “ biskit,” of which a hundredweight is charged 9s. 
 The “ header ” of this item, though placed in close 
 contiguity with edibles was probable intended for 
 bedding rather than for internal consumption. As 
 to liquids, {tea of course was at that time much too 
 txpensive for sailor use) it is a remarkable fact that 
 in all these papers and accounts, although there is a 
 great variety of articles enumerated, there nowhere 
 occurs any mention of coffee, except indeed in one 
 document, a Dutch account of crockery ware, in 
 which appears the line—“1 dosen coffe copes and 
 pleats”—the “ pleats,” no doubt, being intended for 
 use as coolers or “saucers.” Beer or ale, whether of 
 home or foreign manufacture, seems to have been the 
 customary beverage, both ashore amongst the com¬ 
 moner sort of peop’e and afiloat amongst sailors. No 
 occasional work was performed or service rendered 
 without an allowance of beer or ale ; and indeed the 
 cost of such refreshments formed no inconsiderable 
 proportion of the wages paid for such labour and 
 service. Nor indeed is there any mention of whisfasy, 
 
( 4 ) 
 
 either under that familiar name or any other with 
 which the prince of Scotch intoxicants can be identi¬ 
 fied. As illustrative of the habits of our ancestors 
 in this respect we give an unabridged account of 
 date 1732 .— 
 
 To ye boy and Robert Fern for scraping ye 
 
 ship round 2 pynts and 1 bottle, ... 7 6 
 
 To ye men 3 pynts and 3 bottles at severall 
 
 times,. 10 6 
 
 For draying ye sails 3 pynts, . 3 0 
 
 To Jas. Orknay 3 bottles for having ye ship 
 
 of from full sea, . 4 6 
 
 For heaving ye ship to ye pier 4 pynts, ... 4 0 
 
 To ye sailors 3 pynts, . ... 3 0 
 
 To them 3 bottles, . 4 0 
 
 To drink to the fishermen for bringing you 
 
 in, . 12 G 
 
 —the money no doubt being meant for Scots, and if 
 the drink was cheap it must be remembered that a 
 labourer’s wages was less than 7d (6s 8d) a-day, 
 whilst a tradesman’s was no more than 9d or lOd at 
 most. 
 
 An important and favourable change took place in> 
 Captain Stevenson’s circumstances as the result of his 
 acquiesence in a proposal made to him in the following 
 communication , dated 1st October 1724 i — 
 
 Sir,—W e subscrivers hereby impour and com- 
 misionat you to buy for yourself ane ship about fifty 
 tons burden British built. And we promiss and engage 
 ourselves to hold part with you thereof conform to toe 
 shares annexed to our (respective) subscriptions and to 
 answer and pay your draughts on us for our severall 
 shares of the said ship r make the best bargain ye can 
 for your own and our advantage and oblige, your verry 
 humble servants, 
 
 Eliz. Straton, one eight part. 
 
 Jo Stivenson on sixten part. 
 
 David Preshow one eight part. 
 
 Alex. Stenson one eight part. 
 
 Allex. Millne, jun., on sixteen pairt. 
 
 James Sutor one six'een pairt. 
 
 George Beattie for his son 
 
 Alexander Beattie on sixteen pairt. 
 
 To Mr Alex. Stenson, mariner in Montrose. 
 
 Notime was lost in putting this project into ex¬ 
 ecution, a suitable vessel having been procured at 
 Leith in January of the following year. If a second¬ 
 hand ciaft she must have been dismantled, as there 
 is a separate and detailed account of the hull, 3 masts. 
 
( 5 ) 
 
 U anchors, a boom, sailcloth, ropes &cv, and that ehe 
 was not in sailing trim is evident from the fact that 
 there is a Montrose account relating to her outfit in 
 which occurs an item of 6s each to the men for rigging 
 the ship, amounting to 24s of sterling money, which 
 at 6s 8d soots a-day for each man would give about* 
 fortnights’ employment to four men. It may in¬ 
 terest the reader to note here the weight and cost of 
 the anchors as affording some suggestion of the size 
 of the ship, and at the same time a point of compari¬ 
 son with modem prices. The largest was about 3 
 cwt., 2 qrs., and is valued at £4 14s 9d ; another, 2 
 cwt., 3 qrs., value £3 8s 9d ; and the third desi¬ 
 gnated a “ Caege ” or “ Cadge” anehor (it is speb 
 led both ways) furnished by David Forrester of Leith„ 
 “ weghting one hound, and fourtey pound,” cost 
 £1 9s 5d starling monay ” (one pound nine shilons 
 and five pine starling monay). 
 
 In a letter from “ David Prichow,” dated at 
 Leith in May, 1725, and addressed to Mrs Stevenson, 
 whom he calls “ Cousine,” there is a statement of 
 accounts between himself and the Captain in which 
 he accepts one share (a sixteenth part) of the 4 ‘ Suck- 
 cessfull Beatty,” (otherwise Beatey or Betty, such 
 was the ship’s name) as part of the balance in his 
 favour, and the value of this is given as £19 I7s 3d. 
 This would give a total value of £317 16s for the new 
 vessel—^ result that quite corresponds with the de¬ 
 tailed statement to which reference *has already been 
 made. 
 
 In April of the same year he sailed to Stockholm 
 with a cargo of Codfish (306J barrels bulk) and skins, 
 and returned with “ 79 turrs of fine midlin Iron,” 
 a barrel of “Tarr,” and 2 dozen-double deals. In 
 this instance the freight on the outward cargo 
 amounted to £26 Os 5d. 
 
 About the middle of July, Captain Stevenson made 
 a trip to London, having on this occasion a Commis¬ 
 sion from a respectable firm of dealers and exporters 
 in Montrose to dispose of certain useful -commodities 
 for them in the big city, as the following interesting 
 letter shows :— 
 
 Mr Alex. Stienson, 
 
 "Sir, —We have herewith delivered you 5 pounds OJ 
 ounces Rhubarb, ounces “ Contray erva,” 7£ ounces 
 Jallop, which you will do us the favour to stow in the 
 most convenient place of the ship you can, and when 
 you come to London cause taike it ashore in the sailors’ 
 
f * > 
 
 pockets In small parcells and then dispose on it to any 
 druggist for the most you can g©tt, and you may either 
 
 pay in the nett proceeds to J-C-, or send us a 
 
 hill for the same, payable in this place, which will 
 Bauch ©bMge, sir* your humble servants, 
 
 {signed} R-& S-* 
 
 To this is added as a postscript—“You will buy 
 200 of the best hoggesbed hoopes and bring with 
 you.’* 
 
 In the following year we find him again in the 
 Baltic and apparently gathering a cargo for the home 
 voyage in Dantsic and Rotterdam. The following 
 Ml will illustrate the Dantzic trade :— 
 
 To 4 Coayls of Rope 334 {pound) att 14 guilders* 
 A bowline 298 pound att kc. 
 
 130 pound wight of Junk* 
 caggs of black bear. 
 
 A cagg of pickled Couckemors. 
 
 A firecan of Soap* 
 
 A bamborrow line. 
 
 32 skeans of Marlin* 
 
 12 skeans of housing. 
 
 3 skeans of twine. 
 
 An anchor of brandy* 
 
 660 pound of Junk. 
 
 2 dusau of hanckrs. 
 
 The “ black bear ” in the above list of imports is, we 
 presume, a kind of potable liquor resembling porter. 
 4 * Couckemors ” are, of course, cucumbers. But the 
 “ Junk” is a dubious article, as the term signifies 
 salt beef and also M ropes ; probably the latter are 
 intended. 
 
 The trade with Holland embraced such articles as 
 mace, cinnamon, cloves, nutmegs,, tea (of two sorts— 
 Bohea and green, the former purchased at 6 guilders 
 the “pond,’* and the latter at 3J guilders the 
 “ pond,”), brandy (at twelve guilders the “ anher 
 and earthenware. A guilder is equal to one shilling 
 and eightpence sterling, the Exchange being ordin¬ 
 arily 22J ; and the Dutch “ pond ” equals 2 ^ 
 English pounds. 
 
 The following homely letter,, addressed to u Mr* 
 Stenstin ” by a lady friend, further illustrates the 
 intimate commercial relations that subsisted between 
 Montrose and Holland during the earlier part o last 
 century i -— 
 
( 7 ) 
 
 Att Roterd&m, Nobr. IS, 172S. 
 
 This is to Lett you know that I have sentt you. 
 y«®ur Lentt, v hundred wight of Lentt 25 guilders, 
 and ye buudls of packthneed IS guilders* and the pack 
 of Tepe and stringing according to your Decretion is 
 15 guilders and 2 pence, I hop you will be so kind as 
 to Lett my sister know that I have not bought all her 
 things, but so f&rr as her money come to. I have 
 bought 2 Duch stome (stone} which is a cnun. I 
 bought her the Lentt as well as I could. I could have 
 gott other Lentt but nott so good as ill be <8 guilders 
 in the hundred, and the goods is marked A and & 
 No more att presents 
 
 Reett your humble servant, 
 
 Margratt Jofenstoun, 
 
 Most of Captain Beattie’s papers consist o i 
 accounts with home merchants. These afford an 
 insight into the current prices of a considerable 
 variety of articles, between the years 1730 and 1734; 
 and the following are a few gleanings* the rates 
 (being given in sterling money z — 
 
 Biscuit, 'fs a cwt. ; linseed oil, 20d per pint (Scotch); 
 Bohea tea* 7s 7d per lb. (wholesale); Chiri wine,” 
 15d per bottle; “ Whitwine,” 12d; claret, 16Jd ; 
 oranges* lOd per dozen ; canvas* from 8d to 16d per 
 yard ; twine, lSd per lb,; soap, 4^d per lb.; okum, 
 l^d per lb.; a barrel of herrings, 15s ; stockings (men’s)* 
 2s 6d a pair; small beer, 6s per half a hogshead; ale* 
 1 Jd per bottle, or 3d a pint; refined sugar, 7fd per lb. 
 (wholesale); **a boll of bear,” 11s l^d; u a mell of 
 coals,” 3s 2d. To these may be added—Cartage of 3 
 loads of peats for 5 miles, 2s 6d ; 4 months* “ sess” for 
 trade, 4s; rent of a “ Laigh ” house with offices and 
 “heall yeard” attached, £2 Is 8d. And if one were 
 ambitious to become a “Burgher” he had to pa^ 
 £13 6s 8d as “ Guildrie dues.” 
 
 It will be convenient to allude m this place to an 
 account of one of the most respectable merchants in 
 town, as illustrating the mixed nature of the trade of 
 those days. The first two items are Rilk and silk 
 thread, both retailed by weight in small quantities 
 in this instance (so many “drops”). The next is 
 buckram buckrome ”), sold by the yard; and, so 
 far, the merchant keeps in a certain line of goods. 
 But the fourth item is hrirmtone , a commodity then 
 indispensable to every household* but which one 
 oow-a-days would not expect to obtain at a silk 
 mercer’s. The last item is “ bops,” which is again 
 a saqwriee, as it is ©either animal* like fiilk p nor 
 
( 8 ) 
 
 mineral, like brimstone; but vegetable, which is a 
 considerable jump from either. 
 
 In 1733 a house was built to Captain Beattie 7 ® 
 order, where located or of what dimensions record 
 saith not; but about that date there is a wright’s bill 
 in which occurs an entry of 120 “pens of glas/ ? 
 which one should imagine would be sufficient to 
 enlighten a three storey tenement. The rate of 
 charge was 8d per square foot, and from other 
 accounts it would seem that from 3|d to 6d was the 
 usual cost of a single “ pen 17 according to the quality 
 ©f the “glas.” 
 
 Operations towards the accomplishment of this 
 undertaking began about the middle of January, and 
 were continued with apparently little interruption 
 until 5th May. A very formidable bill for drink was 
 accumulating during the progress of this work ; and 
 the purveyor, » Mr Burnett, shows a particularity in 
 noting in his account the varying occasions and cir¬ 
 cumstances of each supply that well illustrates the 
 “sickarness” of the Scotch character in matters 
 pecuniary. There are sixty-seven entries in all, and 
 the “ suma ” amounts to £16 8s 6d scots—the only 
 drink mentioned being ale. Masons (especially), 
 wrights, slaters, barrowmen, and self—all come in 
 for their respective shares with as much regularity as 
 if ale were at that period the currency of the country. 
 Though it is thus nothing but drink, drink, and that 
 confined to the plebeian potation, Mr Burnett has 
 contrived to render his bill almost interesting. The 
 following is a specimen of the entries *.— 
 
 Teb. 16. To Masons, Wrights, and Sclaters, 5 
 
 pynts,.15s 
 
 To ye barowman, 1 botell, . Is 6d 
 
 17. To ye 2 hours, Masons and Wrights, 
 
 6 p.18s 
 
 Mar. 2nd. Your self. Will Straehon, and Alex. 
 
 Bone, 5 botells, .7s 6d 
 
 12th. On boMl vith ye Sclaters, ... ... Is 6d 
 
 17th. To Masons and Wrights at night, 
 
 20 h.30s 
 
 Aprile 23rd. Morning and Night to yeYrights, 
 
 2 p... 6s 
 
 To your oun Chamber on botell, Is 6d 
 
 Such are a few of the entries, und when we come 
 to 4th May we have a new entry, “To your own 
 house on pynt,” implying that at that date he had 
 attained occupation—in fact the final entry in thia 
 
( 9 ) 
 
 account is dated on the following day. It is note¬ 
 worthy that Captain Beattie was on most of these 
 occasions a sharer with the workmen in the refresh¬ 
 ments so generously furnished for them at his 
 expense ; and herein we perceive a feature of the 
 ‘ good old times 5 that no longer holds a place in 
 society in this part of the world at least. The bill, 
 striking as it must appear to modern eyes, is no 
 evidence of low habits or intemperate indulgence on 
 the part of our ancestors ; but it affords proof of 
 something else which is more creditable to human 
 nature than any amount of that punctiliousness and 
 adroitness which may be held to differentiate the 
 present from the past no less than does our profi¬ 
 ciency in sciences and arts. Not only was labour— 
 poorly paid labour—solaced by ale, but engagements 
 were ratified and bargains clinched in a fashion which 
 manifested, as it promoted, the mutual satisfaction 
 and contentment of the negotiators. This curiously 
 comes out in a note which Captain Beattie himself 
 has added to a signed receipt of date 16th April, 
 1733. 
 
 “Note yt I likewise paid ye above Ja. Butchart for 
 twelve dealls and a piece of Ocak Timber laying under 
 the Hill markt WB, the vallwe of the whole sum 
 being 13s 6d st., before Mrs Stienson att amutchken of 
 orangwine .” 
 
 Of the remaining documents I shall transcribe only 
 one, as that one exhibits a style of expression and a 
 mode of spelling which looks much farther back than 
 the first half of the eighteenth century. Unfortu¬ 
 nately it is slightly defective. It has been penned 
 by one quite at home in such tasks— currente calamo 
 —whole words, and those the most crabbed and in¬ 
 volved, having evidently been dashed off with one 
 continuous movement of the hand :— 
 
 “Upon thie — ttien day of Apriell, on thousand 
 — hundred and therttie four yirs, I, James Mill, 
 Constcbll, bay nertou of hies Ma-gestties Justteses ot 
 peace of thie Shier of forfar ther warand, Lafulliy 
 soumond, warnd, and cherged Robr. Jape, bruer att 
 thie mour fiett; John hill, bruer at thie Nord Uattr 
 Siyd ; Allxendr Uhitt, bruer att thie Nord Uattr 
 Siyd ; to compier before thie (saids) Justteses or ther 
 Coram in th^neu Consell housof Monttros on freydey, 
 the nintteen day of Apryell Insttntt bie ten of Cllok in 
 thie for nouen in thie our of caues to ansuer at the 
 insttns of Sir Allexondr Uadiborn, Collektter of hies 
 
( 10 ) 
 
 Maegestties exeis for thie causes Liyblled. Uith 
 (sertification) this I died thie abou dett baiy dlliuring 
 all of them uretten copies sined uith may ouu hand, 
 thiy bing personlliy aprehended by me. 
 
 James Mill, Oonsttbll.” 
 
 Here the meaning is perfectly plain, no word 
 being doubtful, and every letter is in the original 
 individually distinguishable. It will thus be seen 
 that the document has a style and method of its own, 
 and one which cannot reasonably be attributed to 
 eccentricity in the writer. One peculiarity of this 
 style is that the characters v and w are wanting, u 
 doing duty for both, as in the words, “ uertou ” and 
 “ uattr.” When ou has the sound of oo the two 
 letters are placed so as to appear as it intended for 
 ai , only that the dot is awanting. This is the case 
 in the words “mour,” “abou,” and “nouen.” The 
 terminal y is preceded by i, as in “thiy” “baiy,” 
 “ personally.” The sound of ee is expressed by the 
 combination ie, as in “ fiett,” “ hies,” “ thie,” “ com- 
 pier,” and “ maegestties.” The character t t except 
 at the commencement of a word, is, it appears, 
 invariably doubled ; and the 6ame holds good with 
 regard to the l. Such are a few of the singularities 
 of this unique document ; and it may be added that 
 in such respects, as well as in certain others, it is 
 markedly different from an instrument of the same 
 nature, dated March, 1731, in which John Warden 
 appears as constable. 
 
 As an appendix to the foregoing notice, a list of 
 names culled from these papers is here given from 
 which some of our contemporaries will be gratified to 
 discover that they had ancestors so long ago as 1730 
 or earlier ; but such is the indifference of unproper- 
 tied gentiles, in this country at least, to genealogical 
 considerations, that we venture to rest its claims to 
 their attention simply as being, as it appears to us, 
 a choice selection of Scottish family appellatives, 
 very free from admixture with Gaelic, Irish, Welsh, 
 distinctively English, or other more foreign and out¬ 
 landish adulterations. Included are a few Brechiners 
 and others in their vicinity whose names do no dis¬ 
 credit to this roll of forgotten worthies who lived and 
 moved and had their being in the then most fashion¬ 
 able town of the “ Shier” of Forfar :— 
 
 Straton Scott Walace 
 
 Oarnegy Coutts Peddie 
 
 Johnston Sutor Durie 
 
Murison 
 
 ( n ) 
 
 Peat trie 
 
 Ogilvie 
 
 Mill 
 
 Skinner 
 
 Stone 
 
 Preshow 
 
 Stout 
 
 Warden 
 
 Ramsay 
 
 Smith 
 
 Black 
 
 Milne 
 
 Dunbar 
 
 Glen 
 
 Steill 
 
 Butchart 
 
 Barrie 
 
 Strachan 
 
 Burnett 
 
 Rob 
 
 Millar 
 
 Burnes 
 
 Pearson 
 
 Ouehterlony 
 
 Edgar 
 
 Doig 
 
 Lyall 
 
 Wilkie 
 
 Findlay 
 
 Jameson 
 
 Anderson 
 
 Knox 
 
 Lindsay 
 
 Orknay 
 
 Wishart 
 
 Beattie 
 
 Melvil 
 
 Edward 
 
 Allan 
 
 Alexander 
 
 Whyte 
 
 Christie 
 
 Hamptone 
 
 Moleson 
 
 Taylor 
 
 Fothringham 
 
 Wood 
 
 Spence 
 
 Fairweather 
 
 Hill 
 
 Renny 
 
 Henderson 
 
 Mather 
 
 Stevenson 
 
 Hutchen 
 
 Mathie 
 
 Webster. 
 
 
 
 NOTE ON THE OUCHTERLONY FAMILY. 
 
 “ The Ouchterlonys of Guynd came to Forfarshire 
 in or about 1230. Down to 1614 they were of Kelly 
 in the parish of Arbirlot, which they sold to Irvine 
 of Drum, who built Kelly Castle. At the same 
 time they acquired the lands of Guynd, which 
 remained the family estate till the death of John in 
 1843, when it passed to a nephew, Mr Pierson. He 
 also and recently his wife are both deceased, leaving 
 no family.”—(News par). 
 
 The following (doubtless imperfect) list of Ouchter¬ 
 lonys interred in either of the older cemeteries of the 
 town shows the intimate connection maintained with 
 Montrose by this important family during several 
 generations prior to its extinction in 1854 : — 
 
 Robert Ouehterlony, d. 1816, aged 79. 
 
 Anne Renny (his wife), d. 1787, aged 53. 
 
 Their Children 
 
 Robert Oachterlony, died 1827, aged 51. 
 
 (Mary Munds, his wife, d. 1853, aged 56). 
 
 James Ouehterlony, died 1820, aged 52. 
 
 Alithea B. P. Ouehterlony, died 1826. 
 
 Mary O. (Mrs Jas. Walker), d. 1854, aged 81. 
 
 Ann O. (Mrs Jas. Mitchell), d. 1773, ag^d40. 
 
 Rev. Robert O., A.M., (d. 1787?) aged 88. 
 
 Mrs Wm. 0. (Jean Gordon), d. 1753, aged 68. 
 
.< 12 ) 
 
 The above bad an Eoiscopal connection ; those that 
 follow were presumably adherents of the Church of 
 Scotland. 
 
 John O., died 1807. 
 
 Mary Ruperta Skinner (his wife), d. 1830. 
 
 Their Daughters:— 
 
 Elizabeth, died 1825. 
 
 Margaret, d. 1843. 
 
 Anne, d. 1850. 
 
 Henrietta, d. 1853. 
 
 John Ouchterlony, Esq. of the Guynd, died 29th 
 November, 1843, in the 70th year of his age—at that 
 date the last male representative of the family, and 
 as such appropriately memorialised by the broken 
 column which marks the place of his interment in 
 the Old Churchyard. 
 
 The William Ouchterlony mentioned in the above 
 list is in all probability identical with the Captain 
 William Ouchterlony of the papers which have passed 
 under our review. His wife, whose decease is here 
 chronicled, would be, in 1733, of the age of 48 years. 
 
 The Henrietta Ouchterlony, one of the daughters 
 of that John Ouchterlony who died in 1807, and of 
 Mary Ruperta Skinner, was, it seems, an accom¬ 
 plished artist, as her name occurs as painter on a 
 coloured lithograph of a view of the town of Mon¬ 
 trose as it appeared in the early years of the present 
 century. This picture, now in the possession of Mr 
 David Low of Murray Street, is of large size, and is 
 in an excellent state of preservation. Regarded 
 pictorially, as a town scene it could not 
 easily be surpassed ; whilst to Montrosians 
 of the present generation it must have a special and 
 peculiar interest. The point of view is on the high 
 ground on the south side of the river, exactly opposite 
 to and overlooking the erections on the eastern end of 
 the Island. The harbour is lively with shipping, but 
 not a commencement even has yet been made to the 
 quayage that now lines the strand. The Shore Hill 
 boldly confronts the spectator, whilst a little to the 
 north and east the Windmill Hill, crowned with its 
 appropriate edifice in going order, attains an equal 
 elevation. Immediately beyond the Shore Hill the 
 commodious Parish Church with its diminutive steeple 
 is a prominent object, the gradual slope between it 
 and the bridge-end being entirely occupied with sub¬ 
 stantial dwelling-houses mostly of two storeys. An 
 
( 13 > 
 
 excellent view is afforded of the old wooden bridge 
 with a stction of the placid Basin beyond it on the 
 extreme left, its surface dotted with small boats in 
 the distance, which serves effectually to indicate its 
 extent. On the high ground still farther north, 
 besides several homesteads that might be named, the 
 lime-kiln is shadowed forth with an appendage that 
 it has long ago lost—a wreath of smoke towering to¬ 
 wards heaven, and swaying westward as it ought to 
 do to be consistent with other manifest indications of 
 how the wind blows. To the immediate foreground 
 the fair artist has given, with artist licence, a pleasing 
 pastoral aspect not devoid of certain elements of the 
 romantic. But the pen cannot cope with the pencil 
 in the pourtiayal of the charms of landscape, so we 
 shall put a period to this description of Mistress 
 Henrietta’s masterpiece, grateful to her at the same 
 time for preserving for us so attractive a memorial of 
 our native town as it appeared in her youthful days, 
 and of its environments. 
 
 This connection of the Ouchterlonys with Montrose, 
 whilst it may be considered a contributing cause of 
 the prosperity of the town, may also be regarded as 
 an indication of the prominent position it held as a 
 centre of business activity and fashion during the 
 period to which these notes have reference. It no 
 longer enjoys the same happy pre-eminence over 
 neighbouring communities, and it may be that causes 
 similar to those which lead to the decline of nations 
 are in part answerable for the decay of individual 
 townships. The racecourse, the ball-room, the play¬ 
 house, the gaming table, the wine bottle—gay 
 assemblies and interesting kettledrums—have had 
 their day in Montrose, if tradition fables not, and 
 have left it flaccid in muscle and relaxed in nerve, and 
 with an enfeebled (monetary) circulation. If this be 
 so the effects of such an enervating course of indul¬ 
 gence and folly will in time pass away if they have 
 not already passed, and the vis medicatrix naturae 
 will kindly do the rest. Riches will again flow iu 
 upon us, whether from cod-fish or yarn it matters not, 
 and bloom return to the faded rose of our escutcheon; 
 and may truthfulness in word and integrity in act be 
 more and more known as the chief admiring graces 
 of our compatriots !. 
 
( H ) 
 
 NOTE II.—LITERAL AND VERBAL 
 COMMENTS. 
 
 In this the concluding part of our notice I propose 
 to deal with a subject which has already been slightly 
 touched upon (page 10), but which from its interest 
 and importance is judged worthy of a separate and 
 more extended treatment. This subject may, from 
 its nature, be suitably entitled —Some observations 
 on our native language as it was spoken and written 
 by our ancestors. Whatever opinions are here ex¬ 
 pressed, whatever assertions hazarded, are entirely 
 self-originated and claim no authority from any 
 names renowned in philological research. We shall 
 put all such names reverently aside and discuss the 
 matter de novo , trusting for the acceptance of our 
 statements to the accuracy of the facts we adduce, 
 and the reasonableness of our deductions from them. 
 
 Different languages have different alphabets, the 
 Hebrew differing from the Greek and the Greek 
 from the Roman, and even those languages which 
 derive in common and immediately from the Roman, 
 the French, Spanish, Italian, and modern English, 
 differ amongst themselves in this important respect, 
 that whilst their alphabets are alike to the eye they 
 necessarily differ somewhat to the ear, the elementary 
 sounds entering into the spoken language of each 
 nationality not being identical with those that com¬ 
 pose the others. 
 
 The Greek alphabet contained no h, and for the 
 adequate reason that it is not in itself vocal, as any 
 one may ascertain by attempting to pronounce it 
 aloud It has the effect of modifying the character 
 of the vowel which it precedes, the breath in taking 
 such vowel being made semi-vocal in its passage 
 through the throat. It contained no j, k following 
 i ; and although the Latins introduced this letter it 
 had not with them, I apprehend, the same conso¬ 
 nantal power that it has with us now a days „ It 
 was a form of the i, and for that reason follows it in 
 alphab tical order, and its power with them wuuld 
 be fairly represented by our y. Major wouM thus 
 be pronounced mayor (mah-yoi). Ail scholars know 
 that we adopt the sacred name Jesus and the name 
 Jacob directly from the Latin, or, so little is the 
 difference, from the Greek itself; and they are 
 equally aware that these names would be correctly 
 
( 15 ) 
 
 represented with Y as their initial letter. The 
 name Yacoob is indeed common in the East to this 
 day. In like manner the female name Jezebel 
 would be pronouced Yezebel, and we still retain this 
 pronunciation, or, in other words, fall back upon the 
 i sound in the slightly contracted form of the wo d 
 Isebel, or Isabel. The identity of these two letters 
 will appear more evident from what follows In an 
 old volume of divinity, published in quarto in the 
 year 1632 (255 years ago) ; the sheets composing the 
 work, besides being paged in the ordinary way with 
 corner numbers, are marked at the bottom with the 
 letters of the alphabet, the first sheet bein ' marked 
 a, the second b, and so on to z, and this solely wi f h 
 the view of assisting the folder and the binder. In 
 the alphabet as there given there is no j, k following 
 i ; and in the body of the work Jews is printed 
 I ewes. In old account books, where sums of money 
 are set down in letters instead of Arabic numerals, 
 viij would stand for 8, the final i being written 
 in the j form. On a gravestone of last century in 
 the Old Churchyard a favourite text from Job is 
 quoted in full and it contains the pronoun I twice; 
 in both instances this pronoun is expressed by the 
 letter j and doubtless it is on this account (the 
 letter being thus made conspicuous) that we invari¬ 
 ably capitalise this pronoun, there being no reason in 
 the nature of things why it should be so treked more 
 than we or he or any other pronoun. In an old 
 epitaph in Latin in the Episcopal Churchyard the 
 word obiit (died) occurs ; but here the second i is ex¬ 
 pressed by j which it would be impossible to regard 
 as anything else than i. 
 
 In one of our old papers there was an occasion for 
 the use of j in the word, Majesty’s, but it will be re¬ 
 membered that it was expressed by “ Maegestie’s ,k 
 though even here it must not be concluded that the g 
 in this word had a similar power to that of our 
 modern j. It was probably hard, as I believe it to 
 have been invariably hard with the Romans as of 
 course it was with the Greeks. 
 
 Referring to the same document in which the word 
 “ Maegestie’s ” occurs, I pointed out that the letters 
 v and w are both wanting u doing duty for both. I 
 have now to show that these are merely forms of the 
 same letter. In the old quarto volume already called 
 in evidence I find that x follows u in tire alphabet 
 
( 16 ) 
 
 there given, leaving thus only 23 letters instead of 2o 
 as with us. If either v or w was then used it was in 
 accordance with this omission not accounted an inde¬ 
 pendent letter and that being so, not entitled to a 
 place in the alphabet. That w is v appears from these 
 instances:—wine, from vinum ; wasp, from vespis; 
 worms, from vermis; wench, from venus ; weight, from 
 vectum ; woe (wae, Sc.) from me; worry, from voro, 
 &c., only observe, the Romans pronounced these v’s 
 as oo. In an epitaph at Marykirk the word * wolat ’ 
 (flies) occurs for volat In one in the Old Church¬ 
 yard the words though and consumed are both spelled 
 with w instead of u ; and strange to say in the case of 
 the word know this practice is reversed, the w being 
 represented by u and that for the simple reason that 
 the u in this instance leads to no other letter. 
 
 That v was a mode of writing u and meant no more 
 will appear from the fact that the letter which we 
 name “ double u ” ia invariably written and printed 
 both in its simple and capital forms by doubling the 
 form of the v and not not that of the u. It is more 
 usual in old inscriptions to meet with the v form than 
 with the u form where u is intended, as in ‘ pvtis ’ for 
 puts , and in some 17th century inscriptions the v is 
 invariably used instead of u. Add to this that the 
 old Scotch pronunciation of dove , love and brave was 
 dou, lou and braw—“braw lads” signifying brave 
 lads. 
 
 In Burns’s finest lyric, “Bruce’s Address,” the 
 poet commences with “Scots wha hae;” but older 
 Scots than those of Burns’s days would have written 
 quha for wha as also quhan for whan (when) and 
 quhile for while. This old spelling of our ancestors 
 enables us to fix the derivation of such words as who 
 and when , as it points directly to the Latin qui or 
 quae and quando —words, it is needless to say, of 
 precisely the same import with the English relative 
 and adverb.