If the position of the clans was, as we have seen, greatly affected by the statutes passed towards the end of the sixteenth century, the following century witnessed the commencement of a process of change which no less affected the position of the members of the clan as regarded their tenure of the land, which was influenced partly by positive enactments of the Legislature, partly by the increased efficacy of the law of the land, which ignored all Celtic usages inconsistent with its principles, and regarded all persons possessing a feudal title as absolute proprietors of the land, and all occupants of the land who could not show a right derived from the proprietor as simply yearly tenants, and partly by changes which took place in the profitable employment of the land.

The first relation which was assailed was that of the position of the native-men and subordinate septs to the chief, and in 1617 a statute was passed which proceeded on the narrative, that ‘his Majestie’s lieges have sustained great hurt and skayth these many years bygone by the chiefs of clans within the Highlands and Isles of this kingdom, by the unlawful taking from them their children and executors after their decease under the name of Caulpes of their best aucht whether it be on mare, horse, or cow, alleging their predecessors to have been in possession thereof for maintaining and defending of them against their enemies and evil willars of old and ordained that in no time coming none of his Highness’s lieges presume nor take on hand to intromit with nor uplift the said Caulpis within any part of this kingdom.’^[501] In the same Parliament a statute was passed for the protection of the ‘forests within the realm in which deer are kept, and which are altogether wasted and decayed by sheallings, pasturing of horses, mares, cattle, oxen, and other bestial cutting of woods within the bounds of the said forests shooting and slaying of deer and wild fowls with hagbuttis and with dogs in forbidden time.’^[502]

The land occupied by the members of the clan was divided into townships or farms, each township consisting of a certain portion of arable land, meadow, green pasture, and muirland. They were of various sizes, and occupied the lower part of the country, extending in the straths or valleys from the stream, and from the shore of the sea, and the arms of the sea or lochs, to the ridge of the hill behind. A stone fence, called the head-dyke, or an imaginary line answering to it ran along the brae or slope, and separated the arable, meadow-ground, and pasture of the milch cows from the muirland or hill pasture, where the horses, yeld-cattle, and sheep of the farm ranged. The arable land of the township which lay within the head-dyke was usually divided into infield and outfield. In the former the steading, or town as it was called, was situated, and it was kept in tillage, on which all the manure was laid. The outfield consisted of such plots at the bottom of the valleys as were level enough and free of wood or stones to be ploughed, and were kept in corn and lea alternately, the cattle being folded upon them for manure called tathing. The meadows were patches among the fields, too wet, woody, or stony, to be ploughed, and kept under scythe and sickle for a scanty supply of hay; while the faces of the braes, roots of the hills, woody or stony wastes at the bottom, with a small plot near the house, termed the door-land, for baiting horses, were kept as pasture for cattle in summer and sheep in winter; while the sheep and horses were pastured during summer on the muirland or hill pasture, which lay immediately above the head-dyke, and contiguous to the green pasture-grounds.

These farms or townships were occupied in three different ways. They were either possessed by the tacksmen or goodmen themselves, in which case they kept on them a number of cottars, to each of whom they gave a house, grass for a cow or two, and as much ground as would sow about a boll of oats; or they were possessed by sub-tenants, to whom the tacksmen sub-let the whole or a part of the farm, or else they were held direct from the proprietor in joint tenancy by a number of tenants. These tenants and sub-tenants formed a sort of village community, having their houses together, holding the arable land in runrig, which was divided annually by lot among them, and the pasture land in common, each tenant being entitled to pasture a certain number of cattle, sheep, and horses, in proportion to his share of the arable land, which was termed his souming and rouming. In most cases the land was held on what was called a steelbow tenure, when the stock on the farm was the property of the landlord or tacksman, and was let along with the land, and at the end of the lease the tenant or sub-tenant had to return an equal amount of stock or pay the difference. In the Western Isles there was also a kind of tenancy called half-foot, where the possessor of the farm furnished the land and seed-corn, and the other party cultivated the land, the produce being divided.

In the central Highlands the average township consisted of about 90 acres within the head-dyke, of which 20 acres were infield, 15 acres outfield, 10 acres meadow, 35 acres green pasture, and 10 acres woody waste; and the muirland beyond the head-dyke 250 acres. The smaller township contained within the head-dyke 5 acres infield, 4 acres outfield, 2½ acres meadow, 20 acres green pasture, 2½ acres waste, and beyond the head-dyke 75 acres of muirland or hill pasture.

In the Islands the township usually consisted of what was called a penny land, but occasionally of the halfpenny land, termed Leffen (Lethphein). These penny lands, however, were of different sizes. Thus of three penny lands on the south side of Loch Scriden, in the island of Mull, one consisted of 64 acres of infield arable land, 16 of outfield arable, 19 of green pasture, and 497 of hill pasture; another contained 106 acres of infield arable land, 44 acres of outfield arable, 19 acres of green pasture, and 704 of hill pasture and the third consisted of 68 acres of infield arable land, 27 of outfield arable, 29 of green pasture, and 872 of hill pasture. This latter township was occupied by eight tenants, each pasturing twelve cows, with their followers.^[503]

The great mountain ranges and the groups of larger hills either formed deer-forests or lay waste, and within their bounds were shealings or summer pasture attached to farms, when the contiguous muir was not sufficient for hill stock in summer, and here the cows were brought in summer and kept for six or seven weeks.^[504] The peat-mosses furnished the tenants of the farms with their fuel.

The principal deer-forests were to be found in the two great mountain ranges of the Mounth, which extended across the island from the eastern to the western sea, and Drumalban, or the backbone of Scotland, which divided the eastern from the western waters. These forests existed from time immemorial. Thus we find that in 1630 the earldom of Atholl was granted by Charles I. to John, earl of Atholl, with the free forest of Bynzecromby, and all the other free forests of the earldom, the office of forester, and the privileges of the same; and in the Acts of Parliament a statute regarding a forest in the latter range in 1662, when Parliament ratifies a charter granted by King James the Sixth in 1617, constituting the Campbells of Glenurchay heritable foresters and keepers of the forests and woods of Mamlorne, Berinakansauche alias Bendaskerlie, Finglenbeg and Finglenmor; and in order to protect the forest more effectually they have power to escheat or forfeit all horses, mares, kyne, sheep, goats, swine, and other cattle and bestials that shall be found in any time coming feeding within the said woods and forests, or any part of the bounds thereof.^[505]

In the year 1695 a statute was passed to abolish the system of holding land in runrig,^[506] but it was so expressed as to apply only to cases of joint proprietary of the runrig lands, and not to that of a joint tenancy, as was the case in these Highland townships.

In the following century the social position of the Gaelic population in the Highlands and Islands became affected by several causes. These were in the main the introduction of sheep-farming and emigration of the people from various districts; the increased manufacture of kelp; the extension of the culture of the potato, and the system of crofting. When the cessation of these causes, which had kept the Highlands distinct from the rest of the country, brought all classes into contact with a different and more advanced state of society, and the old feudal relations of superior and dependant gradually passed into those of proprietor and tenant, the natural consequence was, from the conversion of services and the different estimate of the relative value of land and people, that the rents were everywhere raised; and this gave rise to the extensive emigration of those who were unwilling to submit to or could not find a place in the new system. Then followed the more profitable occupation of the hill pasture under sheep stock, and the introduction of sheep-farming. The farms held by the tacksmen were very generally converted into sheep-farms, and new ones were created, as opportunity offered, by throwing the townships occupied by the joint tenants into larger farms, and adding extensive ranges of hill pasture to them. So far as the latter was concerned, the placing under sheep of extensive ranges of hill country which had previously either lain waste or been occupied as deer-forests, had no effect upon the population; but it became necessary to remove the small tenants, in order to convert their holdings into wintering for the sheep, and this led to a large portion of the population being dispossessed.^[507] The emigration of the people which had been created by these causes was checked by the American war, but recommenced to even a greater extent after the peace, and continued till the passing of the Emigration Act in 1803. As this emigration had generally consisted of entire families, and many of the tacksmen were accompanied by their dependants, and thus, as the large farms were introduced on the one hand, the dispossessed population emigrated on the other, there was nothing in the change of policy, whether it was desirable in itself or not, which was not in accordance with the principles of social economy, so far as population is concerned. It is estimated that of those who were dispossessed from the sheep-farming, two-thirds emigrated in the beginning of the present century. Various circumstances led, however, to a check being then given to emigration, one principal cause of which was the new source of wealth to the proprietors, and of employment to the population of those districts bordered by the sea and of the Islands, which arose from the increased manufacture of kelp. This manufacture was first introduced so far back as the year 1734, but did not rise into notice till the American war, when kelp reached the remunerating price of £8 per ton. After the termination of that war the price fell, owing to competition in barilla and potash, and kelp was manufactured to but a limited extent till the present century, when it again rose into importance, and had reached in 1806 an average price of £16 per ton, and in 1808, 1809, and 1810 the enormous price of £22 per ton. The increased profits arising from this manufacture caused a great demand for labour, and created a powerful interest in all classes engaged in it to encourage population. At the same time, as it only afforded employment during two months in summer, and, from its being a great object to bring a large quantity as quickly as possible to market, demanded a large amount of labour at one season of the year only, an additional resource was found in the potato, introduced in 1743, but cultivated to a limited extent till this period, when its culture extended as rapidly as the manufacture of kelp had increased, until it became the principal means of subsistence of a large portion of the population.

The increase of the population, and the extension of the culture of the potato which accompanied it, may be illustrated from the statistics of one parish in Skye. The population of this parish in 1801 was 2555. In 1841 it had increased to 3625. In 1801 the produce of the parish consisted of 1600 bolls of oats and bere, and of 5000 barrels of potatoes. In 1841,1618 bolls of grain and 32,000 barrels of potatoes. Thus, while the population showed an increase of 1070, the produce of the cereal crops had undergone little change during the forty years preceding 1841; but the cultivation of the potato had increased sixfold, and consequently furnished the sole additional production to meet the requirements of the additional population.

The crofting system was first introduced by the arable portion of the small farms or townships previously held in common and cultivated in runrig, being permanently divided among the joint-tenants in separate crofts, the pasture remaining in common. This, though an improvement with reference to the cultivation of the farm, was unfortunately not accompanied by any practical guarantee against subdividing, by the security of leases, or by the encouragement and attention which the crofters required. The previous system, where the arable land was held in joint-tenancy, though necessarily implying a low state of agriculture, yet afforded some guarantees in the joint-interest created by it against subdivision; but when the employment afforded by the manufacture of kelp became the principal dependence of all classes, and the cultivation of the land of secondary importance, the comparative independence of the tenants on each other, which resulted from the possession of separate crofts, afforded fatal facilities for subdivision and sub-letting, which were carried to a great extent. This result was likewise increased by separate lotting on the part of the proprietors or of those in the management of their estates. The Fencible regiments had been raised, in many cases, on a promise to give lots or possessions to the recruits, and, when disbanded, these promises had to be redeemed. A system of general and indiscriminate lotting was introduced and carried on, by which separate lots were provided for the population as they pressed still more upon the land, while the employment afforded by the kelp and the increased culture of the potato provided a resource for their occupants. The tendency of all this was greatly to increase the cottar class, who were sub-tenants under the tacksmen and small tenants, their labour being usually taken in place of rent, in return for the lots they held; but with a limited potato-culture and no extraordinary demand for labour, this class had hitherto not been very numerous. Other circumstances still further tended to add to this class of the community. The British Fishery Society had established in 1788 the fishing villages of Tobermory, Ullapool, Stein, and others, with a view of prosecuting a permanent fishing trade; and proprietors had followed their example in setting similar communities on the sea-coast as a resource for the dispossessed population. Small lots, generally about two acres, were given to the proposed fishermen, but these villages failed in the main from various causes, and formed a refuge for the dispossessed population of neighbouring properties, till they furnished examples of the poorest class of lotters or cottars. The extension of the large farms and the removal of the former occupants of the land unaccompanied by emigration—the Highland clearing in the proper sense of the term—necessarily added to the numbers of the same class, and any subsequent enforced emigration was too often of a character which not only did nothing to reduce the numbers of this class, but rather tended to aggravate the evil, as the families it removed were generally of the better class of small tenantry able to provide some part of the cost of transit, while the land they occupied was at the same time withdrawn from cultivation, and those of its occupants who did not emigrate were necessarily thrown upon the cottar population.

Such was the position of the population, when the manufacture of kelp, after proving a source of wealth and employment, ceased to be so remunerative after the repeal of the salt-duty in 1817, and was finally prostrated under the competition produced by the reduction of the duty on barilla. The people had become to a great extent dependent on the potato for a considerable portion of the year, and the employment afforded by the kelp supplied the period between the consumption of the potato crop of one year and that of the succeeding crop. All classes appear to have forgotten that the profits of the kelp manufacture were not the legitimate produce of the land, on which they could depend as proprietors and tenants, but that they were in fact engaged in a manufacture subject to the fluctuations of trade arising from the state of the market, and might be placed in the same position as a manufacturing population during one of the periodical stagnations of trade. The sudden withdrawal of this resource left the main part of the Highland population in a similar situation, except that they had become rooted to the soil and confirmed in habits which unfitted them to meet the crisis. A considerable portion of the population disclosed the appearance of a parasite class, pressing largely upon the means of subsistence and the resources of others, and the cottars having lost the resource of the kelp became exposed to an annual destitution during the period which intervened between the consumption of the produce of each potato crop, until the partial failure of that crop in the years 1836-37, and the more extensive destruction of it in 1847 and three succeeding years, reduced a large portion of the population to a state of absolute destitution for the time, and brought their social position prominently under the notice of all classes of the community.

The statistics of the same parish in Skye will afford a fair illustration of their position during the failure of the potato crop. The parish consisted then of 4826 acres of arable land, 4339 of green pasture, and 37,305 of hill pasture. There were four large farms containing about 1200 acres of arable land, and on these farms there were twenty-five families of cottars. The remaining 3676 acres of arable land were distributed among thirty-seven townships held by 334 families of crofters; and upon these 334 families of crofters there was a parasite population of 300 families of cottars. The particulars of two of these townships will show still more clearly the state of the population at this time. One, consisting of 205 acres, was held by nine tenants, whose families amounted to forty-three persons. Of these 205 acres, 42 were under cultivation, the usual produce of which was sixty-one bolls. They had twenty-four cows, sixteen sheep, and six horses, and the total rent paid by them was £84, and upon this farm therethere were besides ten families of cottars, giving a population of eighty-six souls on a farm paying only £84 of rent. Another township contained 161 acres, and was held by four families of croft tenants. There were only 22 acres under cultivation, yielding on an average thirty-two bolls. They had eight cows, twenty-one sheep, and four horses, and paid £55 of rent, and on this farm were seven families of cottars. In another parish in the same island, a township paying £68 of rent was held by twenty-two families of crofter tenants, while there were located in the township no fewer than twenty-five families of cottars, giving a population of 250 souls dependent on the produce of the ground for subsistence.^[508]

It might, however, be expected that the features of the older state of the occupants of the soil would be longer preserved in the Outer Hebrides where there was less intercourse with the mainland, and an account of the present state of some of the townships in the Long Island has been kindly communicated for this work by Mr. Alexander Carmichael, a gentleman who has been long resident among them, and is intimately acquainted with their condition, which will furnish an appropriate conclusion to this chapter.

‘Old systems are tenacious. They linger long among a rural people, and in remote places. Of these is the land system of runrig (Mor Earann), which characterises more or less the land system of some of the Western Isles (Innsi-Gall). The Outer Hebrides are called the Long Island (Eileann Fada, Innis Fada). They are a series of islands 119 miles in length, and varying from half-a-mile to twenty miles in breadth. This kite-like chain of 40 inhabited and upwards of 150 uninhabited islands contains a population of 40,000. Much of the land is held by extensive tacksmen on leases (Fir-Baile), and, there being no intermediate tenantry, the rest of the land is occupied by small tenants at will without leases. These number 4500, the majority of whom fish as well as farm.

‘The country is divided into townlands of various extent. The arable land (Fearann grainsich) occupied by the small tenants of these townlands is worked in three ways—as crofts wholly, as crofts and runrig combined, and as runrig wholly. In Lewis and Harris the arable land is wholly divided into crofts; in Uist and Barra the arable land is divided, in part into crofts, and in part worked in runrig; while in the townlands of Hosta, Caolas Paipil, and the island of Heisgeir in North Uist, the arable land is worked exclusively upon the runrig system of share and share alike. The grazing ground of the tenants of each townland throughout the Long Island is held in common (in Lewis called Comhpairt).

‘The soil varies from pure sand to pure moss. Along the Atlantic there is a wide plain of sandy soil called Machair. This merges into a mixture of sand and moss (Breacthalamh, or mottled soil), which again merges into the pure moss (Mointeach) towards the Minch. As the soil is dry and sandy, if the summer is dry the crop is light. On the other hand, if the summer is moist the crop is heavy and good. In order that all may have an equal chance, the Machair belonging to them is equally divided among the tenants of the township. Obviously the man who is restricted to his croft has fewer advantages than the man who, together with his croft, has his share of the Machair, and still fewer advantages than the man who has, rig for rig with his neighbours, the run of the various soils of his townland, which gives name to the system. Consequently, a wet or a dry season affects the tenant of the croft system more than the tenant of the combined system, and the tenant of the combined system more than the tenant of the runrig system.

‘The townland of Hosta is occupied by four, Caolas Paipil by six, and the island of Heisgeir by twelve tenants. Towards the end of autumn, when harvest is over, and the fruits of the year have been gathered in, the constable (Constabal, Foirfeadeach) calls a meeting of the tenants of the townland for Nabachd (preferably Nabuidheachd, neighbourliness). They meet, and having decided upon the portion of land (Leob, Clar) to be put under green crop next year, they divide it into shares according to the number of tenants in the place, and the number of shares in the soil they respectively possess. Thereupon they cast lots (Crannachuradh, Cur chrann, Tilgeadh chrann, Crannadh), and the share which falls to a tenant he retains for three years. A third of the land under cultivation is thus divided every year. Accordingly, the whole cultivated land of the townland undergoes redivision every three years. Should a man get a bad share he is allowed to choose his share in the next division. The tenants divide the land into shares of uniform size. For this purpose they use a rod several yards long, and they observe as much accuracy in measuring their land as a draper in measuring his cloth. In marking the boundary between shares, a turf (Torc) is dug up and turned over along the line of demarcation. The ‘torc’ is then cut along the middle, and half is taken by the tenant on one side and half by the tenant on the other side, in ploughing the subsequent furrow; similar care being afterwards exercised in cutting the corn along the furrow. The tenant’s portion of the runrig is termed Cianag and his proportion of the grazing for every pound he pays Coir-sgoraidh.

‘There are no fences round the fields. The crop being thus exposed to injury from the cattle grazing along the side, the people leave a protecting rig on the margin of the crop. This rig is divided transversely into shares, in order to subject all the tenants to equal risk. The rig is called indiscriminately Iomair ionailt browsing rig, Iomair a chruidh the cattle rig, and Iomaire comachaidh the promiscuous rig. The arrangement is named Comachadh, promiscuous. Occasionally and for limited bits of ground, the people till, sow, and reap in common, and divide the produce into shares (Rainn, Ranntaichean) and draw lots. This too is called Comachadh, promiscuous. The system was not uncommon in the past, though now nearly obsolete.

‘In making their own land arrangements for the year, the tenants set apart a piece of ground towards the support of their poor. This ground is called Cianag nam bochd, the Cianag of the poor, and Talamh nam bochd, the ground of the poor. Farm produce given to the poor who go about when the crop is being secured is termed Feigh, Faigh, or Faoigh. The produce for which the suppliant travels denotes the nature of the Faoigh or aid, as Faoigh cloimh wool-aid, Faoigh arair corn-aid, or Faoigh buntata potato-aid.

‘In reclaiming moorland (Mointeach, Sliahb, Riasg), the tenants divide the ground into narrow strips of five feet wide or thereby. These strips, called lazy-beds (Feann-agan, from Feann to scarify), the tenants allot among themselves according to their shares or crofts. The people mutually encourage one another to plant as much of this ground as possible. In this manner much waste land is reclaimed and enhanced in value, and ground hitherto the home of the stonechat, grouse, snipe, and sundew, is made to yield luxuriant crops of potatoes, corn, hay, and grass. Not unfrequently, however, these land-reclamations are wrested without acknowledgment from those who made them.

‘The sheep, cattle, and horses of the townland (Spreidh a bhaile) graze together, the species being separate. A tenant can only keep stock conformably to his share in the soil. He is, however, at liberty to regulate the proportions of the different kinds, provided that his total stock does not exceed his total grazing rights. He may keep a larger number of one species and a corresponding smaller number of another. Or he can keep a greater number of the young and a corresponding less number of the old of the same species, or the reverse. About Whitsuntide, when the young braird appears, the people remove their sheep and cattle to the grazing ground behind the arable land (Gearruidh, Culcinn, Sliabh, or Beinn). This is called clearing the townland, and is variously termed in various districts—Reiteach a bhaile, Glanadh a bhaile, Fuadach, Cartadh, Cusgaradh, Cursgaradh, Usgaradh, and Ursgaradh. The tenants bring forward their stock (Leibhidh), and a souming (Sumachadh) is made. The Leibhidh is the amount of the tenant’s stock, the Sumachadh the number he is entitled to graze in common with his neighbours. Should the tenant have a croft, he is probably able to graze some extra stock thereon, though this is demurred to by his neighbours. Each penny (Peighinn) of arable land has grazing rights of so many soums. Neither, however, is the extent of land in the “penny” nor the number of animals in the soum uniformly the same. The soum (Sum, Suim) consists of a cow with her progeny (Bo le h-al).^[509] Conformably to the code of one district this includes only the cow and her calf, and according to the Gaelic distich the calf becomes a stirk at All-Hallows—