"You lost . . . many?"
"Three hundred died before we left. Worse, another four hundred, taken sick aboard ship, died before we reached New York."
"Good Lord! Seven hundred dead - out of twelve hundred!"
"Aye. God's hand was heavy upon us. But - we should never have left. I forbade it. But . . ."
"You were in charge, were you not, man?"
"Only as adviser. There was a Council of Seven elected. And these were weak, quarrelsome. Incompetent, well-born bunglers. When I was stricken with sickness I was carried out to the ship, unconscious. For they believed that it was the land which was the killer, the fools! And the ships, crowded with sick, were worse, a hundred times! Many did not wish to leave. But those damned councillors insisted. At forty-eight hours' notice. None were to stay. I was carried with them. We should have stayed, we should have stayed!"
Andrew stared at the man. "It is scarcely to be credited! After all the labour, the high hopes, the money!"
"Aye. All to be done again."
"But - the second expedition ? Thirteen hundred men. When they arrived, it would be to find all gone, deserted?"
"To be sure. But the houses, the fort, the cannon and works would still be there. Pray God these were better led. And had the right supplies . . ."
"Yes, yes - we saw to that. Captain Jamieson told us. But -they would face the same conditions. And without
your
guidance. Have we but thrown good money after bad? Not that the money is the worst of it, but men's lives . . ."
"No, no. If we keep them well supplied. Until they can grow their own crops. Send live beasts, cattle, sheep, pigs, poultry . . ."
"The Company has no more money. Already it is in debt."
"Then we must raise more. At once. That is vital."
"Will, my friend - I
do not think that you understand. It will be very difficult to raise more. What we did raise was a miracle - a series of miracles! Half the total coin of the country! The land is bled dry of moneys. And now, folk will be despondent, believe all to be wasted. They will not readily find more."
"They must be told. Understand that if they would save their investment they must find more meantime. The project has not yet had a chance . . ."
"They will be hard to convince. You did not commence the transportation?"
"No. How could we? The few mules we could gather had to be eaten for meat. We did dig a small canal, as ensample. It was a notable success. But there was not the time for more."
"You say that you sailed for New York? Why was that?"
"I did not so choose. It was the shipmasters who believed that the orders from London to the governors of colonies, not to deal with us, would only apply to those nearby - Jamaica, the Barbadoes, the Jerseys, the Carolinas. And further north, in New York, Massachusetts and Acadia there were numbers of Scots and we would be better received. It was not so - not in New York, where we had much trouble. And we lost two ships by storm
..."
The tale of disaster went on.
Andrew was proved all too accurate as to Scotland's reception of the tidings from Darien. Disappointment, disillusion, resentment, anger - these were the usual reactions. The main wrath was against England and King William, of course. There was talk of outright war; the separation of the crowns became a popular slogan; and Jacobite and even republican sentiment flourished. But some of the ire spilled over, inevitably, on to those most prominently connected with the venture - including to be sure Andrew Fletcher, whose comparatively brief spell of popularity came to a sudden end. William Paterson was booed in the streets of Edinburgh. The fact that he had lost more than anybody else in the collapse did not save him. Especially when the news arrived that the second expedition, after a successful voyage and landing, had also abandoned the
colony. This completed the Company's disesteem, almost disgrace. It seemed that almost at once, whilst the new settlers were surveying the deserted New Edinburgh they were attacked by a large force of Spaniards in a fleet especially sent out from Seville, an English squadron again standing by and watching. Campbell of Finab, with his trained fighters, defeated a force six times their numbers. But more than a military victory was required to convince this second party that they could succeed where the first had failed and gone. If Paterson himself had been there, it might have been different. Moreover these were more soldiers than settlers. Abandonment again.
Paterson, recovered somewhat in health, was not put down in spirit. Of all things, recognising that Scotland would have none of him meantime, he decided that his vision might still be saved by convincing
English
opinion that there was vast wealth in the transportation and canal scheme. England's finances were scarcely prospering under Godolphin; and the Bank of England was veering this way and that without its founder's direction. And the King was always needing money for his foreign adventures. So south he went, promising that he would try to save the great Scots investment yet; and that the terms he would demand for English participation would produce financial compensation for the Scots loss. None believed him, and his going went unlamented.
Andrew, Belhaven, Tweeddale and their colleagues could not take this route out. They had to stay and suffer, in varying degrees, in disrepute, unpopularity and loss of office as well as in their pockets. Part of Andrew's price was the loss of his Haddingtonshire seat in that year's Parliament, voted down for the first time.
He was not alone in that, to be sure, many others falling in a wave of reaction. The peers, who sat by right of their title, remained, of course, but it was a sadly weakened legislature at a time when Scotland needed strength, with poverty, despair talk of war, the Jacobites rising again especially in the Highlands, and much reform undone.
Strangely, talk of union grew, at least amongst the aristocracy.
The
eighteenth century had started badly.
20
On how small a matter may hang the fates of men and even nations. In March of 1702 William the First of the United Kingdom, the Third of England and the Second of Scotland, was thrown from a nervous horse, broke his collar-bone and died a few days later. And, as at a stroke, all was changed, dynastically, politically and, for many, personally. For he died childless. And whatever the Dutch situation, the accepted heir to his thrones of England and Scotland was Anne, his late wife's younger sister, and daughter of James, married to the ineffective Prince George of Denmark. Protestant Anne, therefore, almost automatically mounted both thrones -although admittedly she had the half-brother, whose birth had caused so much heart-burning in 1688, exiled in France. Their father had died the year before.
This situation had two important consequences, other than the inevitable ones relative to any change of monarch. First of all, it meantime took much of the heat out of the Jacobite cause, for of course Anne herself was a Stewart; so the Stewart-supporting Jacobites no longer had much of a case; only the Roman Catholics had anything to fight about. Secondly, however, the problems and controversies were only postponed, not solved. For Anne was now thirty-seven, unlikely to bear any more children - and the last of her numerous but sickly offspring had died in 1700. Which left the succession once again in major doubt. The nearest Protestant heir was distant indeed, the Princess Sophia, daughter of Elizabeth of Bohemia, Charles the First's beautiful daughter, married to the late Elector of Hanover, her son George being the present Elector. This was a far cry from the ancient Stewart dynasty -but the alternative was Catholic James, now in his fourteenth year and in the care of the King of France. After Anne's last child died, the English Parliament, in typical fashion, had hastily passed an Act of Settlement, settling the crown on this Sophia and her son - the
United Kingdom
crown, not just
the English one, with no consultation with Scotland. There had been, of course, vigorous protest by the Scots, notably by Andrew Fletcher, although being no longer in Parliament he had to make it privately and in pamphlet form.
Now, suddenly, much was altered, even if that situation was not. Anne was an Episcopalian, and although not a woman of any strong character or convictions, was under the influence of fervid Episcopalians of the Tory persuasion, and chose her ministers in England accordingly, shunning the more liberal Whigs. Unfortunately she did the same for Scotland, where the Episcopalians were an unpopular minority. So a new ministry, under the Douglas Duke of Queensberry and the Ogilvie Earl of Seafield, formerly Findlater, was appointed - and of all things, Stair created an Earl - much to the people's wrath. And this had the effect of making popular those who publicly opposed the new ministry. Since Andrew was prominent amongst these, he was a beneficiary. The blame for his share in the Darien disaster tended at last to be overlooked and he was able to take a more active part in politics again. With Belhaven, Marchmont, Tweeddale, Annandale and the new Duke of Hamilton - the old autocrat had died some years earlier -something that came to be called the Country or National Party began to form, in which Andrew took a leading part.
This process was expedited by a new development, a policy promoted by the English government for an incorporating union with Scotland. Hitherto many English politicians had mooted it, in a general way, as a means of silencing the troublesome Scots once and for all. Now it became an official objective and Queen Anne backed it, largely over the succession issue. Loud was the outcry, the people angry, the Country Party vociferous, even some Tories uneasy. Andrew's old theme of separating the crowns came much to the fore and he began to be cheered in the streets of Haddington and Edinburgh - a change from Darien boos.
In the election of May 1703 he was returned once more as commissioner for Haddingtonshire, in resounding fashion. None was happier over this than his sister-in-law, for she had found it galling indeed to watch him fretting and frustrated, month after month, having to hold himself in, his energies and
abilities unwanted, his eloquence gagged. There were no fewer than four new works ready for the printer, but this was insufficient outlet for his vigorous spirit. He had more and more turned his mind to land improvement; but, although he was Laird of Saltoun again, the estate had been for so long Henry's responsibility and there were inevitable differences of opinion and priority.
Now Andrew could take the lead on the national scene, and that he did, with a will. He managed to gather a group of the most prominent and influential members of the Country Party, the evening prior to the opening of Parliament, at Holyroodhouse of all places, in the quarters of the new Duke of Hamilton, to thrash out with them a strategy. If it might seem extraordinary that such magnates as the Duke, the Marquis of Tweeddale and the Earls of Marchmont, Annan-dale, Leven and Southesk should acknowledge leadership by a mere East Lothian laird, all recognised that had not Andrew so consistently opposed and worked to reduce the powers of each monarch in turn since Charles the Second, he too undoubtedly would by this time have been amongst the ennobled. Offence towards the fount of honour was not the way to such promotion.
Andrew proposed both a strategy and tactics therefore. He listed no fewer than a dozen headings for which they should press, to be included in an Act of Security - to ensure the continued independence of Scotland, to limit the powers of the crown, to maintain freedom of religion and to improve the government of the realm. On three or four they might possibly be prepared to negotiate or even yield, meantime; but on the main principles they must stand united. The vital issue was that Parliament should be supreme, the will of the people the touchstone.
This went down reasonably well with his hearers. But when he went on to indicate the necessity of restricting the powers of the crown, he was less well received. He emphasised that all monarchs, being human, could do ill, especially those who ruled from a distance. And a woman monarch could be worst of all, since she was liable to be swayed and manipulated by unscrupulous men. Queen Anne was known to be weak. So
the Scots Estates must
rule
and Anne
reign.
The crown must not be able to manipulate Parliament, as in the past; by failing to call it, by creating unlimited numbers of lords; by appointing to high office irrespective of parliamentary will; by refusing royal assent to acts passed; by declaring war or peace without consent; and so on. The alternative was to have their own separate monarch once more, here, where they could exert the required control.
Despite the coughs and raised eyebrows, Andrew did get general agreement on the strategy. Tactics were to press hard from the start, to put their requirements forward in the right order, and clause by clause so as to enlist the support, or at least the non-opposition, of the Whigs, the Jacobites, even the Catholics. It should be possible, with care, to get their Act of Security through. The burghs and shires, would, he believed, be preponderantly in favour. It was the lords who would present the difficulty, so many new-appointed peers with eyes firmly fixed on Whitehall.