[225] An objection is perhaps started, that these incorporated individuals are not Gipsies. They have been brought into the body at such an age as to leave no trace of past recollections, leaving alone past associations. There was no occasion for such children being either “squalling infants,” or of such an age as was likely to lead them to “betray the Gipsies,” as Mr. Borrow supposes would be the case, when he says that Gipsies have never stolen children, to bring them up as Gipsies. How are they to discover their origin, when so many of the body around them have the same colour of hair and complexion? If the idea has ever entered into their imaginations, it has led to a greater antipathy towards their own race, and attachment to the tribe, from the special education which they have received to those ends. So far as the matter of blood is concerned, they are not what may be physiologically called Gipsies; and, by being married to Gipsies, they become doubly attached to the body. What has been said of children introduced among the Gipsies, in the way described, applies with infinitely greater force to those born of one of such parents.

Suppose, for instance, that the Spanish race was originally of an exclusively dark hair and complexion: should we therefore say that a fair Spaniard, at the present day, was no Spaniard? Or that the Turks of Constantinople, on account of the mixture of their blood, were not Turks? In the same manner are Gipsies with white blood in their veins Gipsies. They may be half-breed, but it would be improper to call them half-caste, Gipsies. But what are full-blood Gipsies, to commence with? The idea itself is intangible; for, by adopting, more or less, wherever they have been, others into their body, during their singular history, a pure Gipsy, like the pure Gipsy language, is doubtless nowhere to be found.

An English Gipsy acquaintance, of perfect European appearance, who, for love of race and language, may be termed “a Gipsy of the Gipsies,” admitted that he was only one-eighth Gipsy; his father, a full-blood white, having married a quadroon Gipsy. He spoke Gipsy with great fluency. He married a seven-eighths Gipsy. Were his descendants to marry what are supposed to be pure Gipsies, the result would be as follows: the first generation, (his children,) would be one-half Gipsy; the second, three-fourths; the third, seven-eighths; the fourth, fifteen-sixteenths; the fifth, thirty-one thirty-seconds; and the sixth, sixty-three sixty-fourths. If this were to go on ad infinitum, the issue would always lack the one part to make the full blood. But the Gipsies do not calculate their vulgar fractions so closely as that; the division of the blood doubtless bothers them, so that they “lump” the question. What has been said, is breeding up. Sometimes they breed down, and sometimes across. Mixing the blood, in this way, is quite a peculiarity among the English Gipsies. I asked my friend, if he was sure his wife was a pure Gipsy. He said she was considered such, (I have put her down at seven-eighths,) but that one of her forefathers was a fair-haired French Gipsy. According to a well-admitted principle in physiology, a fair-haired Gipsy, of almost full blood, is by no means so rara avis in terris as a white crow. Some of the children of my acquaintance took after himself, and had blue eyes; and others after the mother, and had black ones. But the English Gipsies, (the tented ones at least,) are much purer, in point of blood, than their brethren in Scotland. Many of the Irish Gipsies have very red hair—fiery and shaggy in the extreme. Indeed, they seem to be pretty much all of a fairish kind.—Ed.

[226] The following extract from the Fife Herald, for the 18th June, 1829, will give the reader an idea of a Scotch “country-keeper,” at the time alluded to: “A Gipsy chief, of the name of Pat Gillespie, was keeper for the county of Fife. He rode on horse-back, armed with a sword and pistols attended by four men, on foot, carrying staves and batons. He appears to have been a sort of travelling justice of the peace. The practice seems to have been general. About the commencement of the late French war, a man, of the name of Robert Scott, (Rob the Laird,) was keeper for the counties of Peebles, Selkirk, and Roxburgh.”

[227] The late Mr. Charles Alexander, tenant of Happrew.

[228] We may very readily believe that almost all of the Gipsies would desert the army, on landing in America, and marry Gipsy women in the colonies, or bring others out from home, or marry with common natives, or return home. Indeed, native-born American Gipsies say that many of the British Gipsies voluntarily accepted the bounty, and a passage to the colonies, during the war of the Revolution, and deserted the army on landing. This would lead to a migration of the tribe generally to America.—Ed.

[229] “When Paris was garrisoned by the allied troops, in the year 1815, I was walking with a British officer, near a post held by the Prussian troops. He happened, at the time, to smoke a cigar, and was about, while passing the sentinel, to take it out of his mouth, in compliance with a general regulation to that effect; when, greatly to the astonishment of the passengers, the soldier addressed him in these words; ‘Rauchen Sie immer fort; verdamt sey der Preussische Dienst;’ that is: ‘Smoke away; may the Prussian service be d——d.’ Upon looking closer at the man, he seemed plainly to be a Zigeuner, or Gipsy, who took this method of expressing his detestation of the duty imposed on him. When the risk he ran, by doing so, is considered, it will be found to argue a deep degree of dislike which could make him commit himself so unwarily. If he had been overheard by a sergeant or corporal, the prugel would have been the slightest instrument of punishment employed.”—Sir Walter Scott: Note to Quentin Durward.

Mutilation was also very common among the English Gipsies, during the French war. Strange as it may appear, the same took place among them, at the commencement of the late Russian war; from which we may conclude, that they had suffered severely during the previous war, or they would not have resorted to so extreme a measure for escaping military duty, when a press-gang was not even thought of. An English Gipsy, at the latter time, laid two of his fingers on a block of wood, and, handing his broom-knife to his neighbour, said, “Now, take off these fingers, or I’ll take off your head with this other hand!”

During the French war, Gipsies again and again accepted the bounty for recruits, but took “French leave” of the service. The idea is finely illustrated in Burns’ “Jolly Beggars:”

“Tune—Clout the caudron.

Poosie Nancie and her reputed daughter, Racer Jess, were very probably Gipsies, who kept a poor “Tinkler Howff” at Mauchline.

Gipsies sometimes voluntarily join the navy, as musicians. Here their vanity will have a field for conspicuous display; for a good fifer, on board of a man-of-war, in accompanying certain work with his music, is equal to the services of ten men. There were some Gipsy musicians in the fleet at Sebastopol. But, generally speaking, Gipsies are like cats—not very fond of the water.—Ed.

[230] Mr. Borrow mentions having observed, at a fair in Spain, a family of Gipsies, richly dressed, after the fashion of their nation. They had come a distance of upwards of a hundred leagues. Some merchants, to whom he was recommended, informed him, that they had a credit on their house, to the amount of twenty thousand dollars.—Ed.

[231] In his enquiry into the present condition of the Gipsies, our author has apparently confined his remarks exclusively to the body in its present wandering state, and such part of it as left the tent subsequently to the commencement of the French war. In the Disquisition on the Gipsies, the subject will be fully reviewed, from the date of arrival of the race in the country.—Ed.

[232] This is quite common. An English mixed Gipsy spontaneously informed me that he had been a constable In L——, and that he had a cousin who was lately a runner in the police establishment of M——. Among other motives for the Gipsies joining the police is the following: that such is their dislike for the people among whom they live, owing to the prejudice which is entertained against them, that nothing gives them greater satisfaction than being the instruments of affronting and punishing their hereditary enemies. Besides this, the lounging and idle kind of life, coupled with the activity, of a constable, is pretty much to their natural disposition. An intelligent mixed Gipsy is calculated to make a first-rate constable and thief-catcher. Of course, he will not be very hard on those of his own race who come in his way.—Ed.

[233] Our author frequently spoke of a dissenting Scottish clergyman having been married to a Gipsy, but was not aware, as far as I know, of the circumstances under which the marriage took place. The clergyman was not, in all probability, aware that he was taking a Gipsy to his bosom; and as little did the public generally; but it was well known to the initiated that both her father and mother had cut and divided many a purse. The unquestionable character and standing of the father, and the prudent conduct of the mother, protected the children. One of the daughters married another dissenting clergyman, which fairly disarmed those not of the Gipsy race of any prejudice towards the grand-children. The issue of these marriages would pass into Gipsydom, as explained in the Disquisition on the Gipsies.—Ed.

[234] It is only within these forty years that spoon-making from horn became a regular trade. It would seem the Gipsies had a monopoly of the business; for I am informed that the first man in Scotland who served a regular apprenticeship to it was alive, in Glasgow, in 1836. [There is nothing in this remark to imply that the manufacturing of spoons, and other articles, from horn, may not be monopolized by the Gipsies yet, whatever the way in which it may be carried on.—Ed.]

[235] From the numerous enquiries I have made, I am fully satisfied that the greater part of the vagrants mentioned in these notices are Gipsies; at least most of them speak the Gipsy language. [It matters not whether the people mentioned are wholly or only partly of Gipsy blood; it is sufficient if they have been reared as Gipsies. There are enough of the tribe in the country to follow the kind of life mentioned, to the extent the people can afford to submit to, without having their prerogatives infringed upon by ordinary natives. Where will we find any of the latter, who would betake themselves to the tent, and follow such a mode of life? Besides, the Gipsies, with their organization, would not tolerate it; and far less would they allow any common natives, of the lowest class, to travel in their company.—Ed.]

[236] Owing to such causes as these, many of the Gipsies have been again driven into their holes. It is amusing to notice the tricks which some of them resort to, in evading the letter of the Vagrant Act. They generally encamp on the borders of two counties, which they will cross—passing over into the other—to avoid being taken up: for county officers have no jurisdiction over them, beyond the boundaries of their respective shires.—Ed.

[237] St. Boswell’s fair “is the resort of many salesmen of goods, and, in particular, of tinkers. Bands of these very peculiar people, the direct descendants of the original Gipsies, who so much annoyed the country in the fifteenth century, haunt the fair, for the disposal of earthen-ware, horn spoons, and tin culinary utensils. They possess, in general, horses and carts, and they form their temporary camp by each whomling his cart upside down, and forming a lodgement with straw and bedding beneath. Cooking is performed outside the craal, in Gipsy fashion. There could not, perhaps, be witnessed, at the present day, in Britain, a more amusing and interesting scene, illustrative of a rude period, than is here annually exhibited.”—Chambers’ Gazetteer of Scotland. [This writer is in error as to the Gipsies annoying the country in the fifteenth century: that occurred during the three following centuries.—Ed.]

[238] The Gipsies’ supreme luxury is to lie, day and night, so near the fire as to be in danger of burning. At the same time, they can bear to travel in the severest cold, bare-headed, with no other covering than a torn shirt, or some old rags carelessly thrown over them, without fear of catching cold, cough, or any other disorder. They are a people blessed with an iron constitution. Neither wet nor dry weather, heat nor cold, let the extremes follow each other ever so close, seems to have any effect upon them.—Grellmann on the Hungarian Gipsies.

Their power of resisting cold is truly wonderful, as it is not uncommon to find them encamped, in the midst of the snow, in light canvas tents, when the temperature is 25 or 30 degrees below freezing point, according to Raumer.—Borrow on the Russian Gipsies.

It is no uncommon thing to see a poor Scottish Gipsy wrap himself and wife in a thin, torn blanket, and pass the night, in the cold of December, in the open air, by the wayside. On rising up in the morning, they will shake themselves in their rags, as birds of prey, in coming off their perch, do their feathers; make for the nearest public-house, with, perhaps, their last copper, for a gill; and, like the ravens, go in search of a breakfast, wherever and whenever Providence may send it to them.—Ed.

[239] Some of the itinerant Gipsies, doubtless, use their trades, in a great measure, as a cover for living by means such as society deems very objectionable. Many of them work hard while they are at it, as in the above instance, when “the clink of their hammers was heard from daybreak till dark;” and as has been said of those in Tweed-dale—“however early the farm servants rose to their ordinary employments, they always found the Tinklers at work.”—Ed.

[240] I know another instance of a Gipsy having a child in the open fields. It took place among the rushes on Stanhope-hangh, on the banks of the Tweed. In the forenoon, she was delivered of her child, without the assistance of a midwife, and in the afternoon the hardy Gipsy resumed her journey. The infant was a daughter, named Mary Baillie.

[When a Gipsy woman is confined, it is either in a miserable hut or in the open air, but always easily and fortunately. True Gipsy-like, for want of some vessel, a hole is dug in the ground, which is filled with cold water, and the new-born child is washed in it—Grellmann, on the Hungarian Gipsies. We may readily believe that a child coming into the world under the circumstances mentioned, would have some of the peculiarities of a wild duck. Mr. Hoyland says that “on the first introduction of a Gipsy child to school, he flew like a bird against the sides of its cage; but by a steady care, and the influence of the example of the other children, he soon became settled, and fell into the ranks.” It pleases the Gipsies to know that their ancestors came into the world “like the deer in the forest,” and, when put to school, “flew like a bird against the sides of its cage.”—Ed.]

[241] This invasion of Scotland by Irish Gipsies has, of late years, greatly altered the condition of the nomadic Scottish tribes; for this reason, that as Scotland, no less than any other country, can support only a certain number of such people who “live on the road,” so many of the Scottish Gipsies have been forced to betake themselves to other modes of making a living. To such an extent has this been the case, that Gipsies, speaking the Scottish dialect, are in some districts comparatively rarely to be met with, where they were formerly numerous. The same cause may even lead to the extinction of the Scottish Gipsies as wanderers; but as the descendants of the Irish Gipsies will acquire the Scottish vernacular in the second generation, (a remarkably short period among the Gipsies,) what will then pass for Scottish Gipsies will be Irish by descent. The Irish Gipsies are allowed, by their English brethren, to speak good Gipsy, but with a broad and vulgar accent; so that the language in Scotland will have a still better chance of being preserved.

England has likewise been invaded by these Irish swarms. The English Gipsies complain bitterly of them. “They have no law among them,” they say; “they have fairly destroyed Scotland as a country to travel in; if they get a loan of anything from the country-people, to wrap themselves in, in the barn, at night, they will decamp with it in the morning. They have brought a disgrace upon the very name of Gipsy, in Scotland, and are heartily disliked by both English and Scotch.” “There is a family of Irish Gipsies living across the road there, whom I would not be seen speaking to,” said a superior English Gipsy; “I hate a Jew, and I dislike an Irish Gipsy.” But English and Scottish Gipsies pull well together; and are on very friendly terms in America, and frequently visit each other. The English sympathise with the Scottish, under the wrongs they have experienced at the hands of the Irish, as well as on account of the persecutions they experienced in Scotland, so long after such had ceased in England.

Twenty-five years ago, there were many Gipsies to be found between Londonderry and Belfast, following the style of life described under the chapter of Tweed-dale and Clydesdale Gipsies. Their names were Docherty, McCurdy, McCloskey, McGuire, McKay, Holmes, Dinsmore, Morrow, Allan, Stewart, Lindsay, Cochrane, and Williamson. Some of these seem to have migrated from Scotland and the North of England.—Ed.

[242] In England, some of the Irish Gipsies send their children to learn trades. There are many of such Irish mechanic Gipsies in America. A short time ago, a company of them landed in New York, and proceeded on to Chicago. Their occupations, among others, were those of hatters and tailors.—Ed.

[243] They are neither overgrown giants nor diminutive dwarfs; and their limbs are formed in the justest proportions. Large bellies are as uncommon among them as humpbacks, blindness, or other corporeal defects.—Grellmann on the Hungarian Gipsies.—Ed.

[244] The Ross-shire Advertiser, for April, 1842, says: “Gipsy Recklessness.—Last week, two Gipsy women, who were begging through the country, each with a child on her back, having got intoxicated, took up their lodgings, for the night, in an old sawpit, in the parish of Logie-Easter. It is supposed that they forgot to take the children off their backs, when going to rest; for, in the morning, they were found to be both dead, having been smothered by their miserable mothers lying upon them through the night. One of the women, upon awakening in the morning, called to the other, ‘that her baby was dead,’ to which the reply was, ‘that it could not be helped.’ Having dug a hole, they procured some straw, rolled up the children in it, put them in the hole, and then filled it up with the earth.”

[245] Though Gipsies everywhere, they differ, in some respects, in the various countries which they inhabit. For example, an English Gipsy, of pugilistic tendencies, will, in a vapouring way, engage to thrash a dozen of his Hungarian brethren. The following is the substance of what Grellmann says on this feature of their character:

Sulzer says a Gipsy requires to have been a long time in the army before he can meet an enemy’s balls with decent soldiers’ resolution. They have often been employed in military expeditions, but never as regular soldiers. In the thirty years’ war, the Swedes had a body of them in the army; and the Danes had three companies of them at the siege of Hamburg, in 1686. They were chiefly employed in flying parties, to burn, plunder, or lay waste the enemy’s country.

In two Hungarian regiments, nearly every eighth man is a Gipsy. In order to prevent either them(!) or any others from remembering their descent, it is ordered, by the Government, that as soon as a Gipsy joins the regiment, he is no longer to be called by that appellation. Here he is placed promiscuously with other men. But whether he would be adequate to a soldier’s station—unmixed with strangers, in the company of his equals only—is very doubtful. He has every outward essential for a soldier, yet his innate properties, his levity, and want of foresight, render him incompatible for the services of one, as an instance may illustrate. Francis von Perenyi, who commanded at the siege of Nagy Ida, being short of men, was obliged to have recourse to the Gipsies, of whom he collected a thousand. These he stationed behind the entrenchments, while he reserved his own men to garrison the citadel. The Gipsies supported the attack with so much resolution, and returned the fire of the enemy with such alacrity, that the assailants—little suspecting who were the defendants—were compelled to retreat. But the Gipsies, elated with victory, immediately crept out of their holes, and cried after them, “Go, and be hanged, you rascals! and thank God that we had no more powder and shot, or we would have played the devil with you!” “What!” they exclaimed, bearing in mind the proverb, “You can drive fifty Gipsies before you with a wet rag,” “What! are you the heroes?” and, so saying, the besiegers immediately wheeled about, and, sword in hand, drove the black crew back to their works, entered them along with them, and in a few minutes totally routed them.—Ed.

[246] A Gipsy possesses all the properties requisite to render him a fit agent to be employed in traitorous undertakings. Being necessitous, he is easily corrupted; and his misconceived ambition and pride persuade him that he thus becomes a person of consequence. He is, at the same time, too inconsiderate to reflect on danger; and, artful to the greatest decree, he works his way under the most difficult circumstances. Gipsies have not only served much in the capacity of spies, but their garb and manner of life have been assumed by military and other men for the same purpose.—Grellmann on the Hungarian Gipsies.

Mr. Borrow gives a very interesting description of a meeting of two Gipsies, in a battle between the French and Spaniards, in the Peninsula, in Bonaparte’s time. In the midst of a desperate battle—when everything was in confusion—sword to sword and bayonet to bayonet—a French soldier singled out one of the enemy, and, after a severe personal contest, got his knee on his breast, and was about to run his bayonet through him. His cap at this moment fell off, when his intended victim, catching his eye, cried, “Zincali, Zincali!” at which the other shuddered, relaxed his grasp, smote his forehead, and wept. He produced his flask, and poured wine into his brother Gipsy’s mouth; and they both sat down on a knoll, while all were fighting around. “Let the dogs fight, and tear each other’s throats, till they are all destroyed: what matters it to us? They are not of our blood, and shall that be shed for them?”

What our author says of there being danger in employing Gipsies in time of war has little or no foundation; for the associations between those in the opposite ranks would be merely those of interest, friendship, assistance, and scenes like the one depicted by Mr. Borrow. The objection to Gipsies, on such occasions, is as applicable to Jews and Freemasons.—Ed.

[247] A writer in Scotland corresponds with an attorney in England. It is interesting to notice the opinion which the Gipsy entertained of the writers. Possibly he had been a good deal worried by them, in connection with the conduct of some of his folk.—Ed.

[248] There is something singularly inconsistent in the mind of the Gipsies. They pride themselves, to an extraordinary degree, in their race and language; at the same time, they are extremely sensitive to the prejudice that exists against them. “We feel,” say they, “that every other creature despises us, and would crush us out of existence, if it could be done. No doubt, there are things which many of the Gipsies do not hold to be a shame, that others do; but, on the other hand, they hold some things to be a shame which others do not. They have many good points. They are kind to their own people, and will feed and clothe them, if it is in their power; and they will not molest others who treat them civilly. They are somewhat like the wild American Indians: they even go so far as to despise their own people who will willingly conform to the ways of the people among whom they live, even to putting their heads under a roof. But, alas! a hard necessity renders it unavoidable; a necessity of two kinds—that of making a living under the circumstances in which they find themselves placed, and the impossibility of enforcing their laws among themselves. Let them do what they may, live as they may, believe what they may, they are looked upon as everything that is bad. Yet they are a people, an ancient and mysterious people, that have been scattered by the will of Providence over the whole earth.”

It is to escape this dreadful prejudice that all Gipsies, excepting those who avowedly live and profess themselves Gipsies, will hide their race, if they can, and particularly so, in the case of those who fairly leave the tent, conform to the ordinary ways of society, and engage in any of its various callings. While being convoyed by the son of an English Gipsy, whose family I had been visiting, at their house, where I had heard them freely speak of themselves as Gipsies, and converse in Gipsy, I said, in quite a pleasant tone, “Ah, my little man, and you are a young Gipsy?—Eh, what’s the matter?” “I don’t wish to be known to the people as a Gipsy.” His father, on another occasion, said, “We are not ashamed to say to a friend that we are Gipsies; but my children don’t like people to be crying after them, ‘Look at the Gipsies!’” And yet this family, like all Gipsies, were strongly attached to their race and language. It was pitiful to think that there was so much reason for them to make such a complaint. On one occasion, I was asked, “If you would not deem it presumptuous, might we ask you to take a bite with us?” “Eat with you? Why not?” I replied. “What will your people think, if they knew that you had been eating with us? You will lose caste.” This was said in a serious manner, but slightly tinged with irony. Bless me, I thought, are all our Scottish Gipsies, of high and low degree, afraid that the ordinary natives would not even eat with them, if they knew them to be Gipsies?—Ed.

[249] It it well to notice the fact, that by giving a Gipsy child a good education, it became “entirely spoiled.” It would be well if we could “spoil” all the Gipsies. A thoroughly spoiled Gipsy makes a very good man, but leaves him a Gipsy notwithstanding. A “thorough Gipsy” has two meanings; one strongly attached to the tribe, and its original habits, or one without these original habits. There are a good many “spoiled” Gipsies, male and female, in Scotland.—Ed.

[250] The education and acquirements of the Spanish Gipsies, according to Mr. Borrow, are, on the whole, not inferior to those of the lower classes of the Spaniards; some of the young men being able to read and write in a manner by no means contemptible; but such never occurs among the females. Neglecting females, in the matter of education, is quite in keeping with the Oriental origin of the Gipsies. The same feature is observable among the Jews; and the Talmud bears heavily upon Jewish women. Every Jew says, in his morning prayer, “Blessed art thou, O Lord, our God, King of the Universe, who hast not made me a woman!” And the woman returns thanks for having been “created according to God’s will.”—Ed.

[251] The ostensible reason which the Gipsy gives for not attending church, when travelling, is to prevent himself being ridiculed by the people. If he enters a place of worship, he makes the old people stare, and frightens the children. On returning from church, a child will exclaim, “Mother, mother, there was a Tinkler at the kirk, to-day.”—“A what? a Tinkler at the kirk? What could have possessed him to go there?”

Gipsies are extremely sensitive to the feeling in question. A short time ago, one of them entered ——, in the State of ——, with a “shears to grind,” having a small bell attached. Some bar-room gentry assembled around him, and saluted him with, “Oh, oh, a Gipsy in a new rig!” So keenly did he feel the insult, that he at once left the village.—Ed.

[252] According to Grellmann, the Gipsies did not bring any particular religion with them from their own country, but have regulated it according to those of the countries in which they have lived. They suffer themselves to be baptized among Christians, and circumcised among Mahommedans. They are Greeks with Greeks, Catholics with Catholics, Protestants with Protestants, and as inconstant in their creed as their place of residence. They suffer their children to be several times baptised. To-day, they receive the sacrament as a Lutheran; next Sunday, as a Catholic; and, perhaps before the end of the week, in the Reformed Church. The greater part of them do not go so far as this, but live without any religion at all, and worse than heathens. So thoroughly indifferent are they in this respect, as to have given rise to the adage, “The Gipsy’s church was built of bacon, and the dogs ate it.” So perfectly convinced are the Turks of the insincerity of the Gipsy in matters of religion, that, although a Jew, by becoming a Mahommedan, is freed from the payment of the poll-tax, a Gipsy—at least in the neighbourhood of Constantinople—is not, even although his ancestors, for centuries, had been Mahommedans, or he himself should actually have made a pilgrimage to Mecca. His only privilege is to wear a white turban, which is denied to unbelieving Jews and Gipsies.

Mr. Borrow says, that when the female Gipsies, who sing in the choirs of Moscow, were questioned, in their own language, about their externally professing the Greek religion, they laughed, and said it was only to please the Russians.

The same author mentions an instance in which he preached to them; taking, for his text, the situation of the Hebrews in Egypt, and drawing a comparison between it and theirs in Spain. Warming with his subject, he spoke of the power of God in preserving both, as a distinct people, in the world to this day. On concluding, he looked around to see what impression he had made upon them, but the only response he got from them all was—a squint of the eye!—Ed.

[253] What our author says of the politics of the Gipsies is rather more applicable to their ideas of their social position. Being a small body in comparison with the general population of the country, they entertain a very exclusive and, consequently, a very aristocratic idea of themselves, whatever others may think of them; and therefore scorn the prejudice of the very lowest order of the common natives.—Ed.

[254] Before the reformation of our criminal law, many of the male Gipsies perished on the gallows, but now, the greatest punishment they meet with is banishment, or a short imprisonment, for “sorning, pickery, and little thieving.” Few of them are now “married to the gallows tree,” in the manner of Graham, as described under the head of Fifeshire Gipsies. Owing to their, (the more original kind especially,) all marrying very young, and having very large families, their number cannot fail to encrease, under the present laws, in a ratio far beyond that of our own population. Instead of there being only 5,000 Gipsies in Scotland, there are, as I have already said, nearer 100,000, for reasons to be given in my Disquisition on the Gipsies.—Ed.

[255] Speaking of the attempted civilization of the Gipsies, by the Empress Maria Theresa, Grellmann says, “A boy, (for you must leave the old stock alone,) would frequently seem in the most promising train to civilization; on a sudden, his wild nature would appear, a relapse follow, and he become a perfect Gipsy again.”

“Curate.—Could you not, by degrees, bring yourself to a more settled mode of life?

“Gipsy.—I would not tell you a lie, sir; I really think I could not, having been brought up to it from a child.”—Hoyland on the English Gipsies.

The restless desire which the more original kind of Gipsies, and those more recently from the tent, have for moving about, is generally gratified in some way or other. The poorer class will send their wives and young ones to the “grass,” in company with the nomadic portion, or to the streets in towns. In either case, they have no great occasion to feel uneasy about their support; for she would be a poor wife indeed, if she could not forage for herself and “weary bairns.” Among other things, she can hire herself to assist in disposing of the wares made by another Gipsy. Her husband will then work at his calling, or go on the tramp, like some of our ordinary mechanics.

The feeling which mankind in general have for the sweets of the country, and the longing which so many of us have to end our days in the midst of them, amount almost to a mania with these Gipsies. Frequently will Gipsies, in England, after spending the best part of their lives in a settled occupation, again take to the tent; while others of them, on arrival in America, will buy themselves places, and live on them till seized with the travelling epidemic, communicated by a roving company of their tribe accidentally arriving in their neighbourhood. Some of the more recently settled class of Gipsies, whose occupations do not easily admit of their enjoying the pleasure of a country or travelling life, show a great partiality to their wandering brethren, however poor, with whom they are on terms of intimacy, and especially if they happen to be related. Their children, from hearing their parents speak of the “good old times”—the “golden age” of the Gipsies—when they could wander hither and thither, with little molestation, and live, in a measure, at free-quarters, wherever they went, grow impatient under the restraint which society has thrown around them; and vent their feelings in abusing that same society, and all the members thereof. They envy the lot of these “country cousins.” Meetings of that kind render these Gipsies, (old as well as young,) irritable, discontented, and gloomy: they feel like “birds in a cage,” as a Gipsy expressed it. Not unfrequently will a young town Gipsy travel in the company of these country relatives, dressed a la Tinklaire, as a relief to the discontentment which a restrained and pent-up life creates within him. At other times, his parents will know nothing of his movements, beyond his coming home to “roost” at night.

The nomadic class take to winter-quarters in some village, towards the close of the year, and fret themselves all day long, till, on the return of spring, they can say, “To your tents, O Gipsies!” There is as little direct relation existing between the tent and the long-settled Gipsies, as there is between it and ordinary Scotch people. But there is that tribal or national association connected with it, that is inseparable from the feelings of a Gipsy, however high may be the position in life to which he may have risen.—Ed.

[256] The Fourteenth Annual Festival of the Rev. James Crabb’s Association, for civilizing and teaching the principles of Christianity to the Gipsies in England, was held on the 25th December, 1841. At that time, twenty Gipsy youths were attending his school. He was very sanguine of ultimately ameliorating the condition of the British Gipsies.

At Yetholm, in the same year, after the Rev. John Baird’s school had been in existence about two years, there were about forty Gipsy children receiving instruction. When they were educated, they were hired as servants to families, or bound apprentices to different trades.

[I will offer some remarks on the improvement of the Gipsies, in the Disquisition on the Gipsies.—Ed.]

[257] It is a difficult matter to tell some of the settled Scottish Gipsies. In searching for them, some regard must be had to the employment of the individual, his associations, and his isolation from the community generally, beyond what is necessary in following his calling and out-door relations, as contrasted with his hospitality to strangers from a distance; a close scrutiny of the habits of himself and his numerous motley visitors; the rough-and-tumble way in which he sometimes lives; his attachment to animals, such as horses, asses, dogs, cats, birds, or pets of any kind; these, and other relative circumstances, go a great way to enable one to pounce upon some of them. But the use of their language, and the effect it has upon them, (barring their responding to it,) is, at the present stage of their history, the only satisfactory test. Scottish Gipsy families will generally be found to be all dark in their appearance, or all very fair or reddish, or partly very fair, and partly very dark, and sometimes dark or fair nondescript. Many of the residentary class of mechanic Gipsies are difficult of detection; so are the better classes, generally, if it is long since their ancestors left the tent—Ed.