of Glenfinnan. Marching

southward, Charles's forces were largely augmented, and, passing Sir John Cope's army, which had left the Scottish capital in search of the invader, the latter entered the palace of Holyrood and was proclaimed as "King James VIII." at the High Cross of Edinburgh. Cope's army, which meanwhile had gone as far north as Inverness, was conveyed by sea to Dunbar, thence, proceeding westward by the shores of the Frith of Forth, it met the young Prince's forces at Prestonpans and by them was defeated. Charles, elated at his victory, reëntered Edinburgh, where he held high carnival, the Scottish nobles with their ladies being greatly enamored of the youth and beauty of the " gay chevalier."

After loitering some weeks at the Scottish capital, Charles Edward, at the head of 5,000 men, now entered England, where he expected to be joined by English Jacobites and to march on London. But in this he was disappointed, for at Derby he was compelled to return to the north, closely followed by new musterings of the royal troops under the Duke of Cumberland. The Highland chiefs had opposed the march into England, since the English, though indifferent to the Hanoverian House, had for the most part lost all feeling of loyalty to the Stuarts. This neutrality of the English Jacobites, combined with the approach of the armies of Wade and Cumberland, counselled retreat, and, after winning the battle of Falkirk (Jan. 17, 1746), the Prince continued his way back into the Highlands of Scotland, and three months later gave battle to Cumberland on Culloden Moor. Charles Edward's little army, exhausted with a futile night march, halfstarving, and broken by desertion," was in no condition to withstand the onslaught of the Royalists, whose force was augmented by 5,000 Hessians, while the King's ships intercepted all succor from France. The battle was sharp and decisive, and, the day going against him, Charles fled from the disastrous field, and the cause of the Stuarts was forever lost. Its adherents were mercilessly put to death, and the young Prince was for over five months a hunted fugitive. To the romantic devotion of Flora Macdonald, the Prince owed his ultimate escape to France, despite the reward of £30,000 which had been placed upon his head.

To the

In France we lose track of the unfortunate youth, though it is known that he continued to hatch futile plots and to risk his head for his now hopeless cause. Finally he found a refuge in Italy, where he fell into dissolute habits,* and died at Rome in 1788. Many Highland chieftains-including Lords Balmerino, Lovat, and Kilmarnock-the last victims of beheading in Britain- came to the block, while the clans were disarmed and forbidden to wear the Highland costume, and the clan system was broken up.

Such in brief are the salient facts in the career of the Young Pretender. The reader will now be in a position to understand what Mr. Andrew Lang has achieved, in unearthing from British and Continental archives the details of Charles Edward's life in exile after the failure of the Scottish rising, and in piecing out the story of intrigue and treachery of which the unfortunate Prince was the victim. His work, "Pickle the Spy, or the Incognito of Prince Charles," attempts to trace the Prince's life after his forcible expulsion from France in 1748, as the result of the Peace of Aixla-Chapelle, to the period of his father's death in 1766. During the interval it is known that he was secretly harbored in Paris by ladies of high birth, was cloistered in Avignon, Florence and Rome, and even paid two clandestine visits to London, in the interest of his cause. After Culloden, for forty years he lived and plotted in secret, some portion of the time being given to romance and the seductions of an idle society, under the glamour of "Bonny Prince Charlie's" once gay and chivalrous nature.

In 1772 the Prince married a bright girl of nineteen, Louisa, Countess of Albany, afterwards connected with the Italian poet Alfieri; but the marriage was a failure, since by this time Charles Edward was little better than a sot, and the Countess had to seek refuge from his abuse in a nunnery. A daughter for a brief while survived him, known as the Duchess of Albany, but she was the child of his Scottish mistress, Miss Walkenshaw. The last and perhaps the best of the Stuart race, was Charles Edward's brother, the Cardinal and Duke of

*For an estimate of Charles Edward's later social life, see Encyc. Britannica, vol. v. p. 427.

York, who lived on to the year 1807, and before his death surrendered to George IV., then Prince of Wales, the crownjewels, carried off from England by James II.

The ill-fortune that ever dogged the Stuarts is thus summarized by a writer. Between 1371 and 1714 (343 years) fourteen Stuarts sat upon the Scottish, and six of these also upon the English, throne. A race unhappy as few, they were Robert II. (1316-1390); Robert III. (1340-1406), who died of grief, his elder son murdered, his second an English captive; James I. (1394-1437), for eighteen years a prisoner, afterwards murdered; James II. (1430-1460), killed at the siege of Roxburgh; James III. (1451-1488), murdered, with his son in rebellion against him; James IV. (1473-1513), slain at Flodden his much-loved mistress, Margaret Drummond, was poisoned; James V. (1512-1542), who died broken-hearted at the rout of Solway Moss; Mary (1542-1587), beheaded at Fotheringay, thrice a widow and for twenty years a captive; James VI. and I. (1566-1625); Charles I. (1600-1649), beheaded; Charles II. (1630-1685), for fourteen years an exile; James VII. and II. (1633-1701), for twelve years of his youth an exile, and again for the last twelve of his old age; and Mary (1662–1694) and Anne (16651714), his daughters who supplanted him and both died childless. Thus five of the fourteen met with a violent death; two died of grief, and seven succeeded as minors.

We now reach the review of Mr. Lang's work, which the Spectator speaks of as an exposure of Jacobitism

and as the most serious contribution that writer has made to historical, if not to British, literature. The work,

the reviewer adds, is written with a gravity becoming its subject and its author's object. "Occasionally what Mr. Robert Louis Stevenson has termed Mr. Lang's "incommunicable humor" leads him to intrude into regions consecrated to Arnoldian "high seriousness" what looks like irritating flippancy. There is absolutely nothing of the sort here. The book is not only well written-Mr. Lang always writes well-but it is written with a point, purpose, and merciless directness of style which recall Macaulay and Froude, rather than himself, in what is commonly regarded, perhaps, quite errone

ously, as his normal mood. Hitherto Mr. Lang has been accounted somewhat of a Cavalier in his historical sympathies; the strong, scornful-here and there almost hissing-anti-Jacobitism of 'Pickle the Spy' is rather in the vein of the wild westland Whig,' of the sort that fought at Drumclog and fell at Bothwell Bridge. There is only one passage in the book which we greatly object to as recalling the old, good-naturedly, sceptical, and superficial 'There's nothing new and nothing true and it is no matter' view of life and history. It is that in which Mr. Lang minimizes the value of his own historical researches.

He says, 'The whole book aims chiefly at satisfying the passion of curiosity Our history is of next to no political value, but it revives, as in a magic mirror somewhat dim, certain scenes of actual human life.' We beg to differ from him. His history-provided the facts on which it is based are impregnable is of great political value. tears the mask from latter-day 'Prince Charlie' Jacobitism.

It

The work gives us a ghastly Stevensonian-nay, a Zolaesque-picture of the young Pretender as a drunken debauchee, a broken man without candor, courage, character of any sort, incapable of fidelity to a cause, a mistress, or a follower,

hiding in the alcove of a lady's chamber in a convent,' and doing even more contemptible things. Above all, it proves the chivalry of the Highland chieftains to have been an absolute imposture, and allows them nothing but a barbarian and purely physical courage of the wild cat order. When that chivalry was subjected to the test of poverty it broke down; it became treachery of the blackest type. These 'heroes' became spies in the service of the British Government, sold their master's secret, and were willing to sell his person for a mess of pottage. only circumstance that can be considered at all satisfactory in connection with this almost unique treason is that the chief traitor did not even so much as receive the money for which he had sold his soul and his honor. Surely that history cannot be regarded as 'of next to no political value' which virtually though indirectly proves the Hanoverian succession to have been an almost unmixed blessing to the country, and very nearly justifies the hideous Cumberland

The

'settlement' of the Highlands, and the unspeakable massacre of Glencoe.

Mr. Lang began his study of Pickle the Spy-some of whose letters have already been published by Mr. Murray Rose, and which proved him to have been a traitor to Charles, by making known his movements after the '45 to the British Government-in the Pelham Papers in the Additional Manuscripts of the British Museum. These include the letters not only of Pickle but of James Mohr Macgregor, whom Mr. Stevenson has so powerfully portrayed in 'Catriona.' Mr. Lang sent them to Mr. Stevenson for use in a novel which he did not live to finish. Mr. Stevenson believed Pickle to have been James Mohr. Mr. Lang identifies the spy, who styled himself not only Pickle but Roderick Random and Alexander Jeanson, to have been none other than 'young Glengarry,' the son and heir of the very proudest of the Highland chieftains, otherwise Alastair Ruadh

Macdonell.

The leading facts which Mr. Lang has brought together in support of this very grave charge, and the cumulative effect of which, to our thinking, is only too conclusive, may be thus too easily summarized. It is quite certain that Pickle had been an officer in the French Army; it is equally certain that Glengarry was. Both-but no other chief-are represented as having been in Charles's entourage. Both-but no other chiefwere to head Highlanders in what is known as the Elibank attack-it only reached the stage of a plot-on George II. in London in November, 1752. Both were very ill in February, 1753. Both succeeded their fathers in September, 1754. Both were very intimate with the Earl Marischal. Both spell "who" as

"" 'how." Both wrote the same hand. Glengarry is accused directly by Blair, Æneas Macdonald, and Cameron (Lochiel's brother) of theft, forgery, treachery, and finally of selling himself to Prime Minister Pelham in the year 1749. Pickle asks that an answer to a letter of his, written in 1760, be addressed direct to Alexander Macdonell, of Glengarry.

Finally, when Glengarry dies, Pickle's letters cease. It is to be feared there is no getting over these facts, and that this illiterate spy, whose miserable letters helped at least to frustrate Jacobite designs after the fiasco of the '45, was the

greatest of the Highland chieftains, and that compared with him Thackeray's Barry Lyndon is a gentleman.

Mr. Lang, continues the Spectator reviewer, has made other equally important and equally painful discoveries regarding Prince Charles, with the help of the Stuart Papers and other important documents. All readers of the young Chevalier's history are aware that after his expulsion-no other word can be used-from Paris, and his departure from Avignon in 1749, he mysteriously disappeared altogether. He was supposed to have been engaged in political intrigues, and had been 'sought vainly in Poland, Prussia, Italy, Silesia, and Staffordshire.' Mr. Lang has run him to earth in Madame du Deffand's fashionable convent in Paris, where he lived with and was apparently kept by his mistresses, such as Madame de Talmond, Madame de Vassé, and Mdlle. Luci. We see him, the victim of the drink habit, which he acquired in Scotland, fall lower and lower till his death comes as a relief. Mr. Lang incidentally brings into prominence a number of hitherto unknown or little-known facts in connection with the history of Charles and the Jacobites after '45. gives fresh information as to the relations between Frederick the Great and the Jacobites, information that had not received due notice from Carlyle. He throws valuable light on Charles's preparations for the invasion of England in 1750 with twenty thousand stand of

arms.

He

We

He tells more fully than ever before the story of Clementina Walkinshaw, Charles's Scotch mistress, whose daughter, Burns's "Bonnie lass of Albanie,” was legitimized by the Parliament of Paris in 1784, and as Duchess of Albany attended her father in his last days. have some curious light on Charles's relations with Madame de Pompadour. With the help of a letter of Glengarry, Mr. Lang enables us to understand the meaning of the Elibank plot against the life of George II. It is so far pleasing to find from this that Charles had a dislike to assassination. Mr. Lang's book is of very great interest as throwing many sidelights on a mysterious period of British history. But it is of supreme importance as dealing a fatal blow-and one driven home with great ability and Voltairean decision-to British belief in

the young Pretender and the nobility of the Jacobite chiefs. But had he not better be on the outlook for dirks-literary, if not other?

To the Spectator's critique we promised to append Mr. Andrew Lang's rejoinder. Here it is:

"I hope," he says, "that I may be permitted to plead 'Not guilty' of the rather extreme view of Highland character, and of Prince Charles's character, attributed to me by your very kind reviewer of Pickle the Spy' in the Spectator of February 13th. Charles became worthless; but my purpose was to show the extraordinary strain under which a nature originally of brilliant qualities and great charm broke down. He had to live the life of a hunted beast, or go to Rome and abandon hope. Think of the strain on a Prince beset by spies and assassins, compelled to be hidden among women, like Achilles, or to lodge over a butcher's shop, and only go out under cloud of night, the alternative being the ruin of a cause to which he was constant. This course of life broke down Prince Charles. His courage I do not impugn, but defend. Compare him with 'Fecky,' or George IV., or Cumberland, that brutal thief and brave man. No; I draw no Hanoverian or other political moral.

"As to the clans, their courage, selfsacrifice, and fidelity need no praise of mine. In certain chiefs—' these few evil ones,' I said there was a savage duplicity; but if we think of Glengarry, Æneas Macdonald, and the caitiff Samuel Cameron, let us not forget Clanranald, Tiendrish, Kinlochmoidart, Ogilvie, the two Gasks, Invernahyle, Nairne, Strathallan, Flora Macdonald, the good Lochiel, and Pitsligo, the Gordon of his day. Highlanders and Lowlanders meet in this first group of noble names that come into the memory; surely their 'chivalry' was not an absolute imposture.' deed, I reckoned their virtues too familiar for mention, nor do I think that Pitsligo, Gask, or Clanranald would have been ministers inferior in character and parts to Bubb Doddington for Fecky, or Newcastle for George. The loyalty of the common clansmen not only despised wealth, but disdained in several cases to yield to torture.

In

"Of Charles people may hold their own opinions, but I have never found a

hint that Madame de Vessé and Mademoiselle Luci were 'his mistresses,' nor, of course, that he was 'kept' by them, like Marlborough, Porthos, and Tom Jones. They were women of high character, and Mdlle. Ferrand (Luci) was of remarkable philosophic genius. I should indeed deserve to be dirked if I maligned ladies, or the Highlanders as a people."

We take regretful leave of this pitiful but interesting subject, the last romance of the Stuarts, and commend such of our readers as care to pursue the theme to possess themselves of Mr. Lang's notable book. The illumination is great which the author has thrown on the secret history of the era, and his work sets at rest the question who of the Highland companions of the unhappy Prince were loyal and who were treacherous during the dark period of his European hide-and-seek. Certainly, when all is said, there was more of constancy and devotion than of treason, since, amid all the Stuart plottings, the English government and its spies, together with the ambassadors and courts of Europe, were helpless till in 1750 a Highland chieftain of the highest rank basely sold himself to the English Crown. With what assiduity Mr. Lang must have wrought in tracking the events, great and small, of the story, is apparent from the number and variety of the sources which he has industriously tapped, including the Stuart Papers in Queen Victoria's Library at Windsor, the letters of English ambassadors in the State Papers, the political correspondence of Frederick the Great, together with French and other archives. The book contains the spy's unpublished letters and information, with those of another spy of the periodJames Mohr Macgregor- Rob Roy's son.

THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW

N his address to the graduates on the occasion of his first performing the duties of Chancellor of the University of Glasgow, the present Earl of Stair told an anecdote which illustrates the spirit of the mediaval days in which that university had its birth. "I trust," he said, "I shall not be accused of bad taste if I refer briefly to an ancestor of my own, James Dalrymple, afterwards the first Lord Stair, who was educated at this university. Stair entered the regiment of Lord Glencairn as captain, in support of the Covenant. He had not long followed the profession of arms when, hearing that there was a vacant professorship in the university, he came and claimed to be admitted as a candidate."

He appeared at the University, we are told, as a soldier in his buff coat, with blue facings, and demanded admission. After a comparative trial James Dalrymple was declared the successful competitor for the chair of logic. It was the age in which bearing arms was considered more honorable than scholarship, and when the professor was more esteemed by showing the qualities of a soldier. The age was that when the church was paramount over kings and potentates, when the Collegium Generale was established in Glasgow by authority of Pope Nicholas V. The Papal Bull was dated the seventh of January, 1450, and accorded to the new university the power to grant degrees, and appointed the Bishop of Glasgow the Chancellor and Rector. Thus was the second university established in Scotland, that of St. Andrews being the first.

In 1450, the northern kingdom was distracted by the plots of ambitious nobles, a boy king, James II. of Scotland, being on the throne. The people had however time to give attention to the instruction of the rising generation. The parish school was an established institution and was wellnigh universal, while burgh and grammar schools had existed for more than a century. Scotland was one of the earliest European countries to engage, on any considerable scale, in the work of educating the people, and the more general

appreciation and demand for education among her sons appears to have had one important effect on the universities, namely, to make them more democratic and popular than most other colleges that trace their beginnings to the Middle Ages.

It

Without endowments and without property, but with the patronage of two or three small chaplainaries, the University of Glasgow came into existence. was admirably aided in its early struggles by Lord Hamilton, who, in the year 1460, donated to it a building and four acres of ground on High Street. This was the principal street of the old city, where resided the magistracy and the gentry, and its name with the Saltmarket is not unfamiliar to readers of Scottish history and romance. For over four hundred years the fortress-like buildings and the gardens, where had walked, as students, such men as John Knox, Dugald Stewart, James Watt, and Sir William Hamilton, and, as professors, Francis Hutcheson, Thomas Reid, and Adam Smith, constituted the home of the university. as the older part of the city, in the course of time, fell into decay, modern buildings and a new locality had to be found for the institution. In 1871, the university was transferred to Gilmorehill, a small eminence in the western part of the city, overlooking the river Kelvin, and contiguous to one of the public parks. Towards the erection of the new buildings Parliament gave £120,000, and the people gave twice as much more. The buildings are of Gothic design, arranged in an oblong figure, enclosing two quadrangles, separated from one another by the Bute Hall, or chapel, a beautiful structure, to erect which the present Marquis of Bute donated £45,000.

But

A class-room is allotted to each professor, and over the entrance the name of the subject in which he gives instruction is inscribed. Towards the end of October the professor can be found during several days in his private sanctum adjoining his class-room, with pen in hand and register on table welcoming such matriculated students as signify their wish to attend his prelections of the ensuing session, after depositing the