Training for pugilism is nearly the same as for pedestrianism, the object in both being principally to obtain additional wind and strength.—But it will be best illustrated by a detail of the process observed by Crib, the champion of England, preparatory to his grand battle with Molineaux, which took place on the 29th of September 1811.

The champion arrived at Ury on the 7th of July of that year. He weighed sixteen stones; and from his mode of living in London, and the confinement of a crowded city, he had become corpulent, big-bellied, full of gross humours, and short-breathed; and it was with difficulty he could walk ten miles. He first went through a course of physic, which consisted of three dozes; but for two weeks he walked about as he pleased, and generally traversed the woods and plantations with a fowling-piece in his hand. The reports of his musquet resounded everywhere through the groves and the hollows of that delightful place, to the great terror of the magpies and wood-pigeons.

After amusing himself in this way for about a fortnight, he then commenced his regular walking exercise, which at first was about ten or twelve miles a day. It was soon after increased to eighteen or twenty; and he ran regularly, morning and evening, a quarter of a mile at the top of his speed. In consequence of his physic and exercise, his weight was reduced, in the course of five weeks, from sixteen stones to fourteen and nine pounds. At this period, he commenced his sweats, and took three during the month he remained at Ury afterwards; and his weight was gradually reduced to thirteen stones and five pounds, which was ascertained to be his pitch of condition, as he would not reduce farther without weakening.

During the course of his training, the champion went twice to the Highlands, and took strong exercise. He walked to Mar Lodge, which is about sixty miles distant from Ury, where he arrived to dinner on the second day, being now able to go thirty miles a day with ease, and probably he could have walked twice as far if it had been necessary. He remained in the Highlands about a week each time, and amused himself with shooting. The principal advantage which he derived from these expeditions was the severe exercise he was obliged to undergo in following Capt. Barclay. He improved more in strength and wind by his journies to the Highlands than by any other part of the training process.

His diet and drink were the same as used in the pedestrian regimen, and in other respects, the rules previously laid down were generally applied to him. That he was brought to his ultimate pitch of condition, was evident from the high state of health and strength in which he appeared when he mounted the stage to contend with Molineaux, who has since confessed, that when he saw his fine condition, he totally despaired of gaining the battle.

Crib was altogether about eleven weeks under training, but he remained only nine weeks at Ury. Besides his regular exercise, he was occasionally employed in sparring at Stonehaven, where he gave lessons in the pugilistic art. He was not allowed much rest, but was constantly occupied in some active employment. He enjoyed good spirits, being all the time fully convinced that he would beat his antagonist. He was managed, however, with great address, and the result corresponded with the wishes of his friends.

It would be perhaps improper, while speaking of Crib, to omit mentioning, that, during his residence in the north of Scotland, he conducted himself in all respects with much propriety. He shewed traits of a feeling, humane, and charitable disposition, on various occasions.—While walking along Union-street in Aberdeen, he was accosted by a woman apparently in great distress. Her story affected him, and the emotions of his heart became evident in the muscles of his face. He gave her all the silver he had in his pocket.—“God bless your Honor,” she said, “ye are surely not an ordinary man!”—This circumstance is mentioned with the more pleasure, as it affords one instance at least, in opposition to the mistaken opinion, that professional pugilists are ferocious, and totally destitute of the better propensities of mankind. The illustrious Mr. Windham entertained juster sentiments of the pugilistic art, as evinced by the print he presented to Mr. Jackson as a mark of his esteem. In one compartment, an Italian darting his stiletto at his victim is represented; and in the other, the combat of two Englishmen in a ring. For this celebrated genius was always of opinion, that nothing tended more to preserve among the English peasantry those sentiments of good faith and honour which have ever distinguished them from the natives of Italy and Spain, than the frequent practice of fair and open Boxing.

CHAPTER VII.
ON THE PHYSICAL POWERS OF MAN.

The mechanical construction of MAN is admirably adapted to his destination. His body is neither too large nor too small; but of that convenient size which fits him for the station in which he is placed. Were it larger, his activity, and even his strength in proportion to his bulk, would be diminished; and he would thus be deprived of many of those enjoyments which contribute so much to his happiness.—He would lose the services of some of the most useful of the inferior animals; especially those of the Horse, whose power is limited to a degree of strength not much exceeding the carriage of the weight of a man. On the other hand, a diminutive race could neither accomplish those great undertakings which are required for their comfort, nor, perhaps, be able to maintain the dominion of the earth against the beast of the forest. But man enjoys every advantage which can be derived from the exact adjustment of his capacity to his duty; and if he be “fearfully and wonderfully made,” it is in perfect consistency with that wisdom which is displayed in all the works of nature.

As, in this world, man has been placed in the first rank of created beings, his mental powers are not only incomparably beyond those of other animals, but his physical strength also exceeds that of most of them. An ingenious Frenchman ascertained the strength of the human frame, by placing on every part of a man’s body, standing upright, a number of weights in such a manner, that each part supported as much as it could bear relatively to the rest; and it was found by this contrivance, that a man could stand under two thousand pounds.

The bulk of the body of a horse is to that of a man as six or seven are to one; so that, if his strength were proportionate to that of our species, he ought to bear a load of twelve or fourteen thousand pounds; but no horse could carry such a weight; and his strength, therefore, allowing for the difference of size, is not equal to that of man.

In a memoir presented to the National Institute of France, M. Coulomb suggested the idea of ascertaining the quantity of daily action which men are able to furnish by individual labour, according to the different modes in which they employ their strength. And it has been said that, if all the strength a man could exert in a day, were united into a single effort, he could lift (one foot from the ground,) a weight equal to one million seven hundred and twenty-eight thousand pounds, without injuring himself.

The Dynanometer, of M. Regnier, has afforded some curious results regarding the strength of the people of different nations. In the years 1800-1-2-3, and 4, M. Peron sailed on a voyage of discovery with Captains Baudin and Hamelin, in the French ships Le Geographe, and Le Naturaliste; and in the first volume of his Voyage de Decouvertes aux Terres Australes, he gives an account of some experiments he made with this new instrument to ascertain the comparative strength which individuals are capable of exerting.

According to the Dynanometer, M. Peron found, that the inhabitants of the countries under-mentioned, were capable of exerting a force as follows, viz.

From the above experiments it appears, that men in a savage state, are not so strong as those under the influence of civilization; “and thus it is demonstrated, that the improvement of social order does not impair our physical powers, as some persons have imagined.” And it is also evident, that Englishmen possess more strength than Frenchmen; a fact that has been proved as often as our soldiers have charged the French army with the bayonet.

The strength and activity of the human frame arise from the muscular conformation of its parts, and their constant EXERCISE.—Those habituated to carry burdens will bear a load of from six to eight hundred pounds; while other men, of the same weight and apparent strength, would find it difficult to carry more than one hundred and fifty, to two hundred pounds. This difference is the effect of practice; as nature proportionally augments the power of those parts of the body which are most exerted.

From the same cause, watermen, fishermen, and sailors, who are accustomed to the use of the oar, acquire great strength in their arms; but, indeed, the position of the rower is the best calculated of any, for exerting and increasing the muscular power of the body, as every part must be employed at the same time. Accordingly, that hardy race of men whose occupation leads them to ply the oar on our rivers, and along the sea coast, are the strongest and most robust of our species.

Pedestrianism also depends on practice; for the citizen, whose excursions are limited to six or seven miles on a holiday, would be as much fatigued by a walk of double that distance, as a person in the country who is accustomed to travel, would be, by the accomplishment of a journey of fifty or sixty miles. Such is the nature of our physical and intellectual faculties, that they can be improved only by calling them into action, or what is the same thing, they can only be invigorated by the resistance they offer to the pressure of difficulties, and acquire power, therefore, in proportion to the obstacles which they have to overcome.

The strength and activity of men who are inured to the exercise of walking, are truly astonishing. They will travel farther for a week or a month than a horse, and, if habituated to hunting, they will outrun him, and continue the chace much longer. The American Indians, it is said by travellers, pursue the elk with such rapidity, that they are able to fatigue and secure him, although he is as swift as the stag. It is also related of those men, that they will go journies of a thousand leagues in six weeks or two months; or at the rate of about sixty miles a day, over the most rugged mountains, and through tractless countries.

But feats more astonishing than those performed by the Indians, or any other nation, have been accomplished of late years in Britain. Captain Barclay walked one hundred and ten miles in nineteen hours and twenty-seven minutes; and Glanville went a hundred and forty-two miles in twenty-nine hours. In the pages of this volume, we have recorded many examples of the almost incredible strength, agility, and perseverance of modern pedestrians. And as EXERCISE, particularly on foot, is attended by so many advantages to mankind, the Author thinks, he cannot conclude this work with any observations more apposite to the subject than those of the amiable Christopher Christian Sturm. “Man, (says he,) in a state of civilization, does not know how much strength he possesses; how much he loses by effeminacy, nor how much he can acquire by frequent exercise. We cannot but regard with pity those indolent beings, who pass their lives in idleness and effeminacy; who never exert their strength, nor exercise their powers, for fear of injuring their health, or shortening their lives.”

“Let us, in future, therefore, exert all our powers and faculties for the good of our fellow creatures, according to our situation and circumstances; and, if necessity require, let us cheerfully earn our bread by the sweat of our brow; even then our happiness is greater than that of thousands of our fellow men;” and “the more happy we find our lot compared with [that of] the unfortunate victims of LUXURY, the more seriously ought we to apply ourselves to fulfil our duties.”—Sturm’s Reflections, Sept. XV.

APPENDIX.
No. I.
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF BARCLAY OF MATHERS AND URY, IN THE COUNTY OF MEARNS.

Robert Barclay Allardice, Esq. of Ury, in Kincardineshire, is descended from an ancient and honourable family. We can trace his progenitors so far back as to the third year of the reign of Alexander I. son to Malcolm III. king of Scotland; and the tenth of Henry I. son to William the Conqueror; or, to the year 1110.

In the time of William the Lion, there were four eminent persons in Scotland, of the name of Berkeley, or Berkelai, sprung from the same stock, and united by consanguinity, viz. Walter, William, Humphrey, and Robert. The two first were great chamberlains of the kingdom. Walter is so designed in a donation granted by him to the monks of Aberbrothwick, of the church of Innerkelder, in the county of Angus, which is confirmed by William the Lion, and still preserved in the Advocates’ Library of Edinburgh, and also in the Charter of Aberdeen, which remains in perfect preservation in the Record Office of that city. William is likewise designed chamberlain, in a deed granted by the king to the monks of the Cistertian order, which is copied from the original by Anderson, in his Independency of Scotland.

Walter de Berkeley was one of the pledges for William the Lion, to Henry the Second of England, as mentioned in Abercrombie’s history. He was appointed chamberlain in 1165, and was one of those who returned to Scotland with William, about the close of the year 1174[33]. Walter left two daughters only, one of whom, according to Nicols’ Peerage, was married to Seten of Seton, the predecessor of the Earl of Winton.

From these circumstances, it is a natural deduction, that the Berkeley family must have been settled in Scotland long previously to this period. They enjoyed the confidence of the king, and held the highest offices in the state, which would not probably have been the case with men of low extraction, or who had recently emerged from obscurity.

But it appears by charters of confirmation from William the Lion, that Walter de Berkeley of Innerkelder, was cotemporary with, and cousin-german to, Humphrey, the son of Theobald de Berkeley, the original of the family of Mathers, in the county of Kincardine. Theobald lived in the time of Alexander the First, and David the First, kings of Scotland, having been born about the year 1110; and he had two sons, Humphrey and John. Humphrey, being in possession of a large domain in the county of Kincardine, granted a donation to the abbot and monks of Aberbrothwick, from the lands of Balfeith, Monboddo, Glenfarquhar, &c. which is witnessed by Willielmo et Waltero Capellanis dom. regis, Willielmo Cummin, Willielmo Gifford, Phillipo de Moubray, Dom. de Arbuthenot, Phillipo de Mallevill, Johanne de Monfort, Waltero Scot, et Waltero filio suo, Agatha sponsa mea, cum multis aliis. This donation was confirmed by William the Lion, before these witnesses: Waltero et Willielmo Capellanis nostris, Will. Cummin, Phillipo de Moubray, Roberto de Lunden, Roberto de Berkeley, cum multis aliis; apud Forfar, XXVI. Martii.

Humphrey’s donation was renewed and augmented by Richenda, his only child and daughter, with consent of her husband, Robert, the son of Warnebald, ancestor to the Earl of Glencairn. The witnesses to this deed were, Dom. J. Wishart, vicesm. de Mernis, et Johanne filio ejus; Dom. Duncano de Arbuthenot, et filio ejus; Humphreo de Middleton, cum multis aliis. This second grant was confirmed by Alexander II.; the witnesses being A. Abbato de Melross, Ro. Abbato de Newbottle, Tho. de Hay, Alex. de Seton, cum multis aliis, vicesimo die Martii, anno regni nostri, vicesimo quarto. After the death of Robert the son of Warnebald, the monks prevailed on his widow, Richenda, to dispone these lands to them for the third time; et ad majus hujus rei testimonium, in posterum una cum sigillo meo huic scripto, sigillum venerab. patris nostri R. Abredonensis episc. et sigillum Domini Anselm Cammel feci apponi coram his test. Dom. A. Archide Brechin, Dom Nigello de Moubray, Dom. Roberto de Montealto, et Dom. Will. de Hunyter, cum multis aliis. This third deed was confirmed by Alexander II. at Aberbrothwick, the 7th March, (anno 1236,) and thirty-second year of his reign. Coram test. venerab. patr. Ro. Epis. Abre; Willielmo Comite de Marr, Waltero de Moravii, R. de Montealto.

These six documents, viz. the three donations, and the three respective confirmations, were extracted from the Chartulary of Aberbrothwick, which still remains in the Advocates’ Library of Edinburgh, and they may, therefore, be deemed quite authentic.

Humphrey, and his daughter Richenda, having died without male issue, John de Berkeley, the brother of Humphrey, succeeded, and, being dissatisfied with the alienations they had made, he turned the abbot and monks out of all their possessions in his domains. But he was obliged to compromise the matter with them; and, with the concurrence of his heir Robert, he gave them the mill of Conveth, with its appurtenances, in lieu of the lands of which he dispossessed them, burdened, however, with the yearly payment of thirteen merks of silver to him and his heirs.

This agreement was not only signed and sealed by the abbot and monks of Aberbrothwick; by John, and his heir, Robert de Berkeley; but also, una cum sigillis vener. virorum Greg. Episco. Brechin, et, Dom. Willielmo de Bosco, Dom. Regis Can. et Dom. de Lunden, fratris illustr. Regis Alex. apponi procururerent; coram test. Willielmo Capellaro, Dom. Episco. Brechin, Mag. Andrea de Perth, Mag. Hugo de Milbourn, cum multis aliis. This deed was confirmed at Dundee, by King Alexander II.; coram test. Greg. Episco. Brechin, Willielmo de Bosco, nostro cancellario; Ro. de Lunden, nostro fratre; Hugo Cameron, cum multis aliis. These deeds have been preserved in the Chartulary of Aberbrothwick, from which they were extracted; and they sufficiently establish, that Theobald, Humphrey, and John, must have lived in the time of Alexander I. David I. Malcolm IV. William the Lion, and Alexander II. kings of Scotland, who were cotemporary with Henry I., Stephen, Henry II. the first of the Plantagenets; Richard I. and John, kings of England.—Upon the demise of John, the son of Humphrey, he was succeeded by his son,

(3.) Robert de Berkeley, who, as it is already observed, consented to the agreement between his father, and the abbot and monks of Aberbrothwick. He was succeeded by his son,

(4.) Hugh de Berkeley, who obtained a charter from King Robert Bruce, upon Westerton, being lands lying near the mill of Conveth, in Kincardineshire.

(5.) Alexander de Berkeley succeeded his father, Hugh, and to the paternal estates added Mathers, in consequence of his marrying Catharine, sister to William de Keith, marischal of Scotland, as vouched by a charter, dated anno 1351, granted by William de Keith, “with consent (as the deed expresses it) of Margaret, my wife, to Alexander de Berkeley, and Catharine, my sister, his spouse, and the longest liver of them two, and the heirs male of their bodies, my lands of Mathers, datum apud mansum capitale nostrum de Strathekin, die Martii inventione sanctæ crucis, anno 1351. Coram test. reverendo in Christo patr. Dom. Philippo, Dei gratia, Episc. Brechin. Dom. Willielmo eædem gratia Abbato de Aberbrothwick, David de Fleming, Willielmo de Liddel, militibus; Johan. de Seton, et aliis.” This charter is confirmed by King David Bruce, at Perth, the 18th of March, and twenty-first of his reign: coram test. Roberto seneschallo, nepote nostro, (the first king of Scotland of the Stewart race,) Tho. Seneschal, comite de Angus, Tho. de Moravii panacri nostro Scotiæ, Roberto de Erskine, et Tho. de Falside, militibus.

The original charter from William de Keith, and the confirmation by David Bruce, are both in the possession of Mr. Barclay of Ury.

(6.) David de Berkeley, 2d of Mathers, succeeded to his father Alexander; and he married the daughter of John de Seton, who witnessed the above charter from William de Keith. His son,

(7.) Alexander de Berkeley, 3d of Mathers, was his successor, and he married Helen, the daughter of Græme of Morphy. Their son,

(8.) David de Berkeley, 4th of Mathers, succeeding, built the castle, called the Keim of Mathers. He married Elisabeth, the daughter of Strachan of Thornton, then an ancient and flourishing family in the Mearns.

(9.) Alexander Barclay, 5th of Mathers, succeeded his father, David de Berkeley: and he was the first of the family who spelled the name as it is done at present. He married Catharine Wishart, the daughter of Wishart of Pitarrow, and was succeeded by his son,

(10.) David Barclay, 6th of Mathers, who married Janet, daughter of Irvine of Drum, then one of the most considerable families in the shire of Aberdeen. His eldest son was

(11.) Alexander Barclay, 7th of Mathers, who married Marjory, daughter of James Auchinleck of Glenbervie. Auchinleck obtained the estate of Glenbervie, by marrying the daughter of Melvil, the proprietor, who was sheriff of the Mearns, and murdered by the barons. James Auchinleck had two daughters, but no male heir; and the elder was married to Sir William Douglas, the second son of the famous Earl of Angus, called Bell the Cat. By this marriage, the Douglasses got the estate of Glenbervie.

Alexander Barclay sold the lands of Slains and Falside in the Mearns, to Andrew Moncur of Knapp, to whom he granted a charter to be held of himself and his heirs, dated anno 1497. He also granted a precept of Clare constat. to Sir James Ogilvie of Deskford, predecessor to the Earl of Findlater, for infesting him in the lands of Durn, of which he was superior. This precept bears date the 29th April 1510, at Kirktonhill, which was then the principal seat of the family of Mathers. Alexander was succeeded by his son,

(12.) George Barclay, 8th of Mathers, who married Marjory, daughter of Sir James Auchterlony, of Auckterlony and Kellie, then a considerable family in the shire of Angus.—His son’s name was,

(13.) David Barclay, 9th of Mathers, who married first Mary, daughter to Rait of Halgreen, by whom he had George, who succeeded him. He married for his second wife, Catharine Home, and had by her a son named John, to whom he gave the lands of Johnston in the Mearns, as established by Barclay of Johnston’s first charter, dated anno 1560. Barclay of Balmaquean is a cadet of the Johnston family. David Barclay was succeeded by his first son,

(14.) George Barclay, 10th of Mathers, who married Mary Erskine, daughter to Sir Thomas Erskine of Brechin, secretary of state to James V. of Scotland. He married for his second wife, Margaret, daughter to Wood of Bonnington in Angus, afterwards baronets, and now represented by James Wood, Esq. of Woodburnden, in the county of the Mearns; and by her he had a son, to whom he gave the lands of Bridgeton and Jackstown, in the Mearns. His first son succeeded to the estate, and his name was

(15.) Thomas Barclay, 11th of Mathers, who married Janet, daughter to Straiton of Lauristown in the Mearns, a very ancient and honourable family. Thomas Barclay died before his father, leaving only one son,

(16.) David Barclay, 12th of Mathers, who was born anno 1580. He was polite and accomplished, and lived much at Court; but a taste for show and extravagance, led him to indulge in every fashionable expense, by which he greatly impaired his property, and he sold five valuable estates. He was twice married: first, to Elizabeth, the daughter of Livingston of Dunnipace, by whom he had five sons and a daughter; second, to Margaret Keith, grand-child to Earl Marischal. To his daughter he gave a handsome fortune, and to his sons a liberal education. The two eldest died when young: David, the third son, became eminently conspicuous: Robert, the fourth, was rector of the Scots College at Paris; and James, the youngest, was a captain of horse, and was killed at the battle of Philiphaugh, on the 13th September 1645, where he gallantly signalized himself.

(17.) Colonel David Barclay, the first of Ury, and third son of David of Mathers, was born at Kirktonhill in the county of Kincardine, in the year 1610. After being instructed in every accomplishment of the age, he went to Germany, and entered a volunteer in the Swedish service, under the great Gustavus Adolphus. His manly and elegant appearance soon attracted the attention of his majesty, and he acquired a high reputation for courage and bravery. He merited and obtained the distinguished favour of Adolphus. But his fame as an active and experienced soldier having reached his native country, he was pressingly solicited by his friends to return home to take a part in the civil wars with which Scotland was then distracted.

Accordingly, in the year 1646, as a proof of his character and high merit, we find him colonel of a regiment of horse, and at the head of an army quelling an insurrection raised by the Earl of Crawford, who, with a number of Scots and Irish troops had burned several towns, and ravaged the northern parts of the kingdom. The colonel came up with the earl at Banff, entirely routed him, and committed great slaughter among the Irish, who had perpetrated many acts of wanton barbarity throughout the country. In the same year, General Middleton and the colonel were sent with an army to relieve the town of Inverness, at that time besieged by the renowned Marquis of Montrose, and Earl Seaforth. Colonel Barclay, at the head of his regiment, forced the ford of the river Ness, where the enemy was strongly posted; and, being well supported by Middleton, attacked and drove them to the mountains, taking all their cannon and baggage. Inverness being thus relieved, the army retired to the south country; but the Marquis of Huntly taking advantage of its absence, attacked the town of Aberdeen, and became master of it, although bravely defended by the citizens and two regiments under the command of Colonel Harry Barclay, a relative of Colonel David’s, who was taken prisoner, with twenty of his officers. To dispossess Huntly, the parliament, in April 1647, sent Middleton and the colonel again to the north; but the marquis did not think proper to wait their approach, and hastily retreated to the Highlands. To prevent his return, however, they took possession of his strong holds, in which they placed garrisons. Colonel Barclay was appointed governor of Strathbogie and Middleton, of the Bog of Gight, now Castle Gordon.

In the following year, the colonel found leisure to attend to his domestic concerns, and married Catharine, eldest daughter of Sir Robert Gordon of Gordonston, who was second son of the Earl of Sutherland, by Jane, daughter of the Marquis of Huntly. Sir Robert Gordon was cousin to King James the Sixth of Scotland, by his grandmother, Lady Helen Stewart, his majesty’s grand-aunt; and being a man of great parts, was highly esteemed at Court. As the different estates which formerly belonged to the Barclays of Mathers, were now nearly all disposed of by the colonel’s father, he entered into a contract with Earl Marischal for the barony of Ury, where he fixed the future residence of the family, which has since been designed by the name of that property.

Colonel Barclay being an active and experienced officer, and perfectly devoted to the cause in which he had engaged, was appointed to command in the shires of Ross, Sutherland, and Caithness. The nation at that time was much interested in the fate of Charles I.; and the parliament of Scotland sent an army to his assistance in England, under the Duke of Hamilton; and the internal protection of the kingdom was committed to the Earl of Lanark, the laird of Gartland, and Colonel Barclay. The whole country to the north of the Tay, including the town of Perth, was placed under the colonel’s authority; and he executed this important commission with vigour and fidelity. But the Duke of Hamilton’s overthrow at Preston, destroyed the hopes of his friends; and the opposite party gaining the ascendancy, through Cromwell’s means, Colonel Barclay, and many other officers, were deprived of their commands.

From this time, it appears that the colonel laid aside his military character, and lived for several years in retirement at Gordonston, in Morayshire, the seat of his father-in law. But his friend, Earl Marischal, having been taken prisoner by General Monk at Elliot in Angus, and his estates seized, the barony of Ury was included in the forfeiture, on the pretence that it was not fully conveyed by the earl. Colonel Barclay was advised to obtain a seat in the Scots parliament, which would afford him the only means of recovering his property. He was accordingly elected for Sutherlandshire, through the interest of his cousin, the Earl of Sutherland; but he was returned to the next parliament by the counties of Angus and Mearns, through his own influence. He became so popular indeed, by his services, to the nobility and gentry of these districts, that he received their public thanks; and as a mark of their entire satisfaction with his conduct, they again elected him their representative in the year 1656. The colonel obtained the reversal of the forfeiture of his estate, and continued in parliament, successfully exerting himself in behalf of his friends and the distressed loyalists.

For several years, nothing remarkable occurred in Colonel Barclay’s life that deserves our particular consideration; but in 1663, he was unexpectedly arrested and thrown into Edinburgh Castle, by an order from Government. As no crime was alleged against him, he was soon liberated; but it does not appear that he received any compensation for the injury. His arrest was the more surprising, as he had suffered so much in the royal cause, and his principles were well known to be favourable to the Restoration. It is probable, indeed, that this event arose from the resentment of some personal enemy; for malevolence often pursues the best of men, and those eminent for their virtues are by no means exempted from its baneful effects.

Colonel Barclay’s military and political career had now drawn to a close; and his future life was devoted to study, religious abstraction, the practice of charity, and all the benevolent and amiable pursuits of the human mind. In the year 1666, he joined the sect called Quakers, and became as eminent for piety and zeal, in private life, as he had before been distinguished for courage and intrepidity in the field. Religious disputes, however, running high in the country, his life was checquered by many indignities and insults. Those who had caressed him, while at the head of an army, by every flattering mark of respect, now forgot their benefactor, and cruelly sought to embitter his days by persecution. But he steadily adhered to his principles; for it could scarcely be supposed, that a man who had been bred in the camp of the great Adolphus—who had fought for liberty of conscience, and had braved all the dangers of war—could be either intimidated, or diverted from his purpose by the assaults of power, or the threatening clamour of a senseless rabble.

The colonel now generally resided at Ury, enjoying the society of his friends, and disseminating among his neighbours the doctrines of the Quakers. Many of “good account” embraced their tenets; and weekly and monthly meetings of these peaceable and religious people were held at Ury, for devotional exercises. But the clergy looked on them with an eye of jealousy, and stirred up against them the malicious passions of weak and intolerant men. And in the month of March 1676, Colonel Barclay and others, were indicted at Aberdeen, before a committee of the privy-council, for holding meetings contrary to a statute enacted against armed field conventicles, which, under every latitude of interpretation, could not be applied to Quakers. They were, however, found guilty, and amerced in a fine to the amount of a fourth part of their respective valued rents, and committed to prison until payment should be made.

The colonel’s son, the celebrated Apologist, was at that time in London, and having much interest at Court, obtained his father’s liberation. But the magistrates of Aberdeen were so enraged that he should thus escape from their power, that they illegally granted a warrant to distrain his goods, and sent a Captain Melvill to put it in execution, although, his residence being in another county, he was evidently beyond their jurisdiction. Melvill was a low fellow, who had formerly been a trooper in the colonel’s regiment, and was therefore personally known to him; but he had acquired all the insolence of office, and, presuming on the support of the magistrates, drove off the cattle and horses at Ury. In June 1677, he was again imprisoned, along with his son, in the chapel prison of Aberdeen; for the magistrates pursued him and his friends with no moderate degree of malignancy. They were, however, relieved by an order from the Court, in which the magistrates were severely reprimanded for their oppressive conduct.

On this occasion, a friend of Colonel Barclay’s could not avoid regretting the difference of times, and contrasting his present situation, with that when he rescued the city of Aberdeen from the oppressions of Huntly. But this worthy man replied, “that, although the magistrates usually came miles to meet him when he had the command of an army, and, to gain his favour, conducted him amidst the acclamations of the people to an entertainment prepared for him in the town-hall, yet he was more proud, and felt more real satisfaction, in his sufferings for the cause of religion and virtue, than in all the fleeting honours with which they had then distinguished him.”

From this time, Colonel Barclay enjoyed a state of calm and dignified repose. His latter days were sweetened by family endearment, and all the charms of a country life. This brave, sincere, and religious man, died, anno 1686, in the 77th year of his age, and was buried in a cemetery at Ury, which he had caused to be constructed for himself and his posterity. In this humble mausoleum his grave is still to be seen, and it is distinguished for its length; for he was one of the tallest, strongest, and most handsome men in the kingdom.

Colonel Barclay had five children, viz.

• Robert, the Apologist, his heir and successor.
• Jean, married to Sir Evan Cameron of Locheill.
• David, who died on his passage to East Jersey.
• Lucy, who died in April 1687, aged 33.
• ——, who died in East Jersey, in 1731.

(18.) Robert Barclay, generally known by the title of the Apologist, was born on the 28th of December 1648, at Gordonston in Morayshire, the seat of his maternal grandfather. After being educated in the best schools in Scotland, he was placed under the tuition of his uncle, who was rector of the Scots College in Paris. He gave early presages of great genius, and acquired much proficiency in all the learned sciences and elegant accomplishments of the times. He soon became conspicuous, and was particularly noticed for his vivacity and acuteness in the public disputations of the seminary, where he gained many prizes. His uncle was extremely solicitous to detain him in France; but his mother, on her death-bed, had strongly enjoined his removal from the college, lest he should imbibe the errors of popery. In obedience to parental authority, he returned home in 1664, and thus lost his uncle’s fortune and favour, to gratify his father’s conscientious compliance with the prejudiced but pious notions of his mother. Though destitute of wealth, he possessed what was more valuable, for his mind was deeply fraught with the riches of literature.

Soon after his return to Scotland, he joined the society called Quakers, and became their greatest ornament and ablest advocate. Previously, however, to his embracing the opinions of that sect, he visited his friends of all religious persuasions, to canvass their doctrines, that he might adopt a system of faith corresponding to the truths of the gospel; and, by conviction alone, as we are informed, he was guided in his choice. But probably, when in France, he had formed an attachment to the Quietists, who were the Quakers among Roman Catholics.

In the year 1670, he married Christian Molison, of the family of Lachintully, the grand-daughter of the celebrated Colonel Molison, who so much signalized himself in the defence of Candia against the Turks. About this time, he first appeared as an author, by a work, entitled, “Truth cleared of Calumnies,” which is an answer to “A Dialogue between a Quaker and a Stable Christian,” written by William Mitchell, a preacher, and printed at Aberdeen. A keen controversy then subsisted between the clergy of Aberdeen and the Quakers, relative to the doctrines of the latter, which, warmly interesting Barclay, called forth his talents as a polemical writer; and in the same year, he published a postscript in the form of questions. Mitchell replied to “Truth cleared of Calumnies,” and our author again answered him in a work, entitled, “William Mitchell unmasked,” which was published in 1672. In this controversy, Robert Barclay discovers the variety of his learning, and that he was well acquainted with ecclesiastical history; but above all, he shews with how much judgment and dexterity he could apply his knowledge in support of his religious opinions.

In 1673, he published “A Catechism and Confession of Faith,” which is an exposition of the doctrines and principles of the Quakers, supported by an appeal to Scripture testimony. His next publication is the “Theses Theologicæ,” which were addressed “to the clergy of what sort soever,” and contain fifteen propositions, on which he gives his sentiments, and explains them in conformity to the principles of his sect. He vindicated his Theses from the strictures of Nicolas Arnold, professor in the university of Franquer in Friesland, by a Latin treatise printed at Amsterdam, in 1675. In the same year, he published an account of a disputation between the students of divinity of the university of Aberdeen and the Quakers, in which he bore a conspicuous part; but, like most religious controversies, it terminated without satisfaction to either party. The students also published an account of this conference, in a pamphlet entitled, “Quakerism canvassed,” which occasioned a reply, entitled, “Quakerism confirmed,” in two parts, both printed in 1676.

Previously to this time, he generally resided at Ury with his father; but in this year he went to London, and thence to Holland, accompanied by William Penn, the celebrated and amiable proprietor of the province of Pennsylvania. These religious men travelled in Holland and Germany, visiting their friends, and disseminating their doctrines. They waited upon Elizabeth, princess-palatine of the Rhine, at her residence at Herwerden, and were kindly received. She seems to have adopted their doctrines, for she openly patronised the Quakers; but her friendship for Barclay was sincere and unfeigned, and lasted during life. She frequently wrote to him with her own hand; and always promoted his views at the court of England, as far as her influence could be of service to him or his friends. When he returned to London, he learned that his father and other Quakers were imprisoned in Aberdeen, for holding meetings in that city. He therefore presented a memorial in their behalf to Charles II. which was delivered by himself into the king’s own hand, who caused his secretary of state, the Duke of Lauderdale, to underwrite upon it a favourable reference to the council of Scotland, which had the desired effect, as they soon after obtained their liberty.

In this year, (1676,) he published “The Apology for True Christian Divinity,” in Latin, at Amsterdam, which is the most celebrated of his works. It is dedicated to King Charles II.; and the dedication is remarkable for the freedom and boldness of sentiment and language in which his majesty is addressed. “Thou hast tasted,” he says, “of prosperity and adversity; thou knowest what it is to be banished thy native country, to be over-ruled as well as to rule, and sit upon the throne; and, being oppressed, thou hast reason to know how hateful the oppressor is both to God and man. If, after all these warnings and advertisements, thou dost not turn to the Lord with all thy heart, but forget him who remembered thee in thy distress, and give up thyself to folly, lust, and vanity—surely great will be thy condemnation.”—The Apology is reared on the “Theses Theologicæ,” being an exposition of the fifteen propositions contained in that work. The author’s general plan is, to state the position he means to establish, and to support it by Scripture quotations applicable to the case, or to deduce it by an argument in the form of a syllogism. By this learned work, he acquired great celebrity as a deep theologian, profoundly skilled in the scriptures, the fathers, and church history. His next publication, which also appeared this year, is entitled, “The Anarchy of the Ranters,” and it is a vindication of the society from the imputation of disorderly practices in their discipline, of which they were accused by their adversaries.

About the end of September, the Apologist returned to Ury; and although he had obtained his father’s release from confinement, yet he was not able to protect himself. On the 7th November 1676, he was committed to prison in Aberdeen, along with several other Quakers, for holding meetings for public worship, and did not regain his liberty until the 9th of April 1677. While in prison, he wrote a treatise, entitled, “Universal Love considered and established upon its right foundation,” which was published after his release.

He left Ury in May, and went to London to exert himself for the deliverance of the Quakers of the north country, who were still harassed by imprisonment and fines, for holding meetings at Aberdeen, in contravention, as it was alleged, of a statute enacted against “armed field conventicles,” which evidently did not apply to these peaceable people. From “Theobalds near London,” he wrote to the princess-palatine on this subject, in which he gives an account of a conversation that passed between him and the Duke of York relative to the sufferings of the Quakers. It appears by this letter, that he had addressed his royal highness in very plain language, for he says, “I told him, I understood from Scotland, that, notwithstanding Lauderdale was there, and had promised to do something before he went, yet our friends’ bonds were rather increased, and that there was only one thing to be done which I desired of him, and that was to write effectually to the Duke of Lauderdale, in that style wherein Lauderdale might understand that he was serious in the business, and did really intend the thing he did write concerning should take effect; which I knew he might do, and I supposed the other might answer; which, if he would do, I must acknowledge as a great kindness. But if he did write, and not in that manner, so that the other might not suppose him to be serious, I would rather he would excuse himself the trouble:—desiring withal, to excuse my plain manner of dealing, as being different from the court way of soliciting: all which he seemed to take in good part, and said he would write as I desired.”—He soon after returned to Ury, and was permitted to enjoy the full exercise of his religion unmolested, until the 9th of November 1679, when he was taken out of a meeting at Aberdeen, as well as several of his friends but they were discharged in a few hours, and never after wards disturbed by the magistrate.

The “Apology,” which had become widely circulated in six different languages, was rudely assailed by John Brown, in a work, entitled, “Quakerism the path-way to Paganism.” To this abusive performance, Barclay replied in vindication of his doctrines; which is the last of his polemical writings that are published. From this period, he was occupied, for the most part, in travelling in England, relative to the concerns of the society; and, when in London in 1682, he was honoured with a public appointment, having received a commission as governor of East Jersey in America. An extensive tract of land in that province, was, at the same time, granted to him and his heirs in fee. Charles II. confirmed his government for life; and the commission is expressed in terms highly flattering to this good man:—“Such are his known fidelity and capacity,” it says, “that he has the government during life; but that every governor after him shall have it for three years only.” He was authorised to appoint a deputy-governor, with a salary of L 400 sterling per annum; and Gavin Laurie, a merchant in London, was accordingly appointed to that office. Having arranged these matters, he returned to Ury; but in summer 1683, he again visited his friends in London. Towards the close of that year, however, he came home and occupied himself in shipping stores, provisions, and other necessaries, from Aberdeen, to the colony of East Jersey, in the prosperity of which he was extremely interested.

In 1685, he went again to London relative to the concerns of the society; but soon returned, and remained at home till April 1687, when, at the earnest solicitation of George Fox and other friends, he set off for court, to exert his influence on behalf of the Quakers. As the king honoured him with his friendship, he had access to his majesty at all times; and on this occasion, he presented an address from the Quakers in Scotland, expressive of their gratitude for his majesty’s proclamation, permitting liberty of conscience, which was graciously received. The Apologist seems to have stood on a footing of great intimacy with the king, and to have conversed with him candidly and freely on the business of the state. Considering the intricacy of his majesty’s affairs at that time, the opinion or advice of a sincere and honest, yet clear-headed man, was, no doubt, highly valued by James. Having accomplished the object of his journey, he returned home.

In November 1688, he was again in London, and embraced that opportunity to take leave of his majesty, with whose misfortunes he was greatly affected. At his last interview with the king, (while they were standing at a window in the palace conversing together,) James looked out and said, “The wind is fair to bring over the Prince of Orange;” the Apologist remarked, “It was hard that no expedient could be fallen upon to satisfy the people.” His majesty replied, “He would do any thing becoming a gentleman, but never would part with his liberty of conscience.” This sentiment, being so consonant to the Apologist’s mind, and corresponding so closely with his own principles and practice, drew forth his approbation; and with mutual regret they parted, to meet no more.

In the month of December he arrived at Ury, and lived retired for nearly two years, enjoying domestic happiness in the bosom of his family. But having gone to Aberdeen about the end of September 1690, to attend a meeting of Quakers, he caught cold while returning home, and, being seized with a fever, it put a period to his life on the 3d of October, after a short but severe illness.

With a mind naturally strong and vigorous, he possessed all the advantages of a regular and classical education; and his writings evidently shew the profundity of his research, as well as the extent and variety of his learning. His mild temper, benevolent heart, and sprightly conversation, gave him influence with men in elevated stations, which he employed not for the benefit of his friends alone. From motives of pure benevolence, he often successfully exerted himself in behalf of others, as well as for the members of the society to which he belonged. If, on one occasion, he inconsiderately betrayed a fervour of zeal in his profession of a preacher, by exposing himself in sackcloth on the streets of Aberdeen in the year 1672, we must concede to him, at least, the merit of sincerity, and, in justice, make every allowance for the ardour of a youthful mind. Although his feelings were warm, yet his passions were subdued by strict discipline; and the practical observance of the rules of moral duty, strengthened and invigorated every virtuous sentiment. Cheerful, yet serene, he withstood the shocks of adversity with fortitude and firmness. Ever active and indefatigable, he composed one of his best works within the walls of a prison; and, in all situations, he was constantly occupied with what he conceived to be for the good of mankind. Considering the shortness of his life, and the time he employed in travelling, it is astonishing that he could write so much and so well. But his works have outlived him; and, in three volumes, the scattered opinions of the society to which he belonged, are collected, arranged, and exhibited to the whole world in elegant uniformity; and throughout Europe and America, “The Apology for True Christian Divinity,” is to be found in the libraries of the wise and the learned[34].

The Apologist had nine children, and was succeeded by his second son, Robert; the first son, David, having died on a voyage to East Jersey, at the age of fifteen. After the family of Ury had embraced the tenets of the amiable society of Friends, it is not to be expected that it could make any conspicuous figure in the transactions of the times. The pursuits of the Quakers being solely directed to objects of benevolence, they are precluded by both principle and practice, from interfering in civil or military contests. During the turbulent periods of 1715 and 45, the Barclays, therefore, took no concern in public affairs, but remained silent spectators of the passing events.

The Apologist’s son, Robert, had seven children, and died anno 1747. He was a man of such polite manners, that he obtained the appellation of the Gentleman, and was distinguished among his cotemporaries by his good sense and affability. He was succeeded by his eldest son,

Robert, who had three sons and one daughter. The grandson of the Apologist was known in the county by the title of the Strong, having possessed great muscular power. He died in the year 1760, and was deemed the richest commoner in the county of Kincardine, having left a free estate and a considerable sum of money to his family. He was succeeded by his eldest son, Robert, the father of Capt. Barclay.

From these three families a numerous race has sprung, and the descendants of the Apologist, at the present time, exceed three hundred. The late Mr. David Barclay of Walthamstow in Essex, (the grandson of the Apologist,) says, “I believe there are more than three hundred of you who call me uncle or cousin.” Those respectable families which claim their descent from the Apologist, are principally settled in England; and, while they have enriched themselves by their industry, they maintain the highest respectability of character.

It does not, however, suit our object to follow the family of Ury through all its branches: it is enough that we take notice of the heir of succession; and the late Mr. Barclay deserves to be particularly mentioned, on account of his great celebrity as an agriculturist.

He was born anno 1731, and succeeded his father, 1760. He received a liberal education, and was an excellent Greek and Latin scholar. He was a noted pedestrian, and frequently walked to London. On one occasion, he walked from London to Ury, (510 miles,) in ten successive days; on another, he walked 210 miles in three days, or at the rate of 70 miles a day. He also went 81 miles in about 16 hours. He never walked to London after he was elected a member of parliament, as erroneously reported; but he had frequently done so before that time. His ordinary pace was six miles an hour. His height was six feet. He was athletic, and of the handsomest form. The vigour of his mind was conspicuous throughout a laborious and active life; and his improvements in agriculture, entitle him to the warmest eulogy of his countrymen.

Mr. Robertson, the intelligent author of the ‘Survey of Kincardineshire,’ has devoted 27 pages of his work to illustrate Mr. Barclay’s agricultural improvements; and, from his account, as there can be no better testimony, we shall extract the following particulars.

‘The man,’ says Mr. Robertson, ‘who exerted himself most for the improvement of the county—whose labours were the most strenuous and best conducted—and whose example had the most extensive influence—was the late Mr. Barclay of Ury. His, indeed, were no common powers. Endowed with the most ardent, energetic, and comprehensive mind, he employed his great talents as an agriculturist with unwearied perseverance, and to the most beneficial results. The subject he had to improve, or rather to subdue, was of the most obdurate nature; but difficulties tended only to excite his activity, and, adhering tenaciously to his own pre-conceived and well-adjusted plans, he was ultimately successful.

‘The estate of Ury, the chief object of his improvements, lies on both sides of the rivulet of Cowie, and extends from Stonehaven in a north-westerly direction, for nearly five miles. The mansion-house is situated about a mile and a half from the efflux of the Cowie, on its northern bank.—When Mr. Barclay succeeded to the estate, there was scarcely a shrub of any value on the whole property, excepting a few old trees around the house.

‘The arable land was divided into a number of small farms. The tillage was superficially performed, with very imperfect implements. Almost every field was incumbered with obstructions of one kind or another; such as, pools of stagnant water or quagmires, where the cattle were ever in danger of losing their lives; great baulks of unploughed land between the ridges; but, above all, stones abounded, not only on the surface, but through the whole depth of the soil. There were no inclosures. No lime was used as a manure and the only crops were bear and oats. There was neither cart nor wheel carriage of any kind; nor was there even a road. In short, no place, at that time, abounded more in the evils attending the ancient system, or enjoyed fewer of the advantages of modern husbandry than the lands of Ury.’

Mr. Barclay, who had acquired his ideas of agriculture on the fertile plains of Norfolk, could ill brook a state of husbandry like this. As soon, therefore, as he succeeded to the estate, he set about its improvement in a stile that was both radical and permanent. To accomplish this object, he took under his own management all the farms in the vicinity of the mansion-house, as the leases expired; besides retaining those lands which had always been in the natural possession of the family. In the course of thirty years, he thoroughly improved 2000 acres of arable land, and planted about 1500 acres of wood. Of the arable land, there were 800 acres originally marsh or heath. Of the remainder, which was let to tenants, about one-fourth part consisted of baulks, wastes, and marshes, interspersed through every field. Mr. Barclay thus meliorated about 2000 acres, and brought them to a correct state of culture, and they are now in a high degree of fertility.

The laborious measures by which Mr. Barclay improved the estate of Ury, are particularly detailed in the valuable work previously mentioned; but it would carry us beyond our limits to enter minutely into them: and perhaps it may suffice to say, that, from a rugged and barren surface, he produced the most beautiful place in North Britain. He was considered the father of agriculture in the north of Scotland: His example has been everywhere imitated; and his memory is held dear by all the lovers of this first and most important art.

Mr. Barclay represented the county of Kincardine in three parliaments, having been unanimously elected; which is highly creditable to his talents and his virtues. He was the intimate friend of William Pitt, and always distinguished himself by his loyalty, and attachment to the best interests of his country.

It is only necessary to add to this account, that, while Capt. Barclay is descended from respectable ancestors of the ancient family of Barclay, he has an undoubted right, by the mother’s side, to the title of Earl of Monteith and Airth, being the representative of Lady Mary Graham, the eldest daughter of the last Earl of Monteith and Airth, who was descended of David, Earl of Strathern, the eldest son of Robert II. by his queen, Euphemia Ross.

THE END.

D. Chalmers & Co.
Printers, Aberdeen.