The constituency known as Wigtownshire, which comprised the shire of Wigtown and the stewartry of Kircudbright, formed the far south-west tip of Scotland. The area had enjoyed a degree of political unity since the twelfth century as the lordship of Galloway, which was held first by the descendents of the first lord, Fergus, and then by the Black Douglases. In 1455, with the destruction of the Douglas interest throughout southern Scotland, the lordship was annexed by the crown, and it was not until the early seventeenth century that the ancient lordships (shorn of much of their political power) were resurrected, the earldom of Galloway being granted to the Stewarts of Garlies and the earldom of Wigtown to the Flemings. Both the Stewarts and the Flemings supported Charles I in the bishops’ wars of 1639-40, and thereafter the leadership of the region passed to local lairds, backed by a strong Kirk interest. P.H. McKerlie, Hist. of the Lands and their Owners in Galloway (5 vols. Edinburgh, 1876), i. 1-30; Scots Peerage, iv. 160-2; viii. 551. The stewartry had the reputation of being a covenanting stronghold, thanks in part to the enduring influence of Samuel Rutherford, former minister of Anworth, and in the early 1640s the traditional leading family, the Maxwells, were ousted by hardliners backed by a presbytery keen to root out ‘cold covenanters’. L.A.M. Stewart, Rethinking the Scottish Revolution (Oxford, 2016), 243-5. In Wigtownshire, two long-established families were of particular importance: the Agnews of Lochnaw, who had been hereditary sheriffs since 1452; and the McDowalls of Garthland, who claimed descent from Fergus, the original lord of Galloway. Sir Patrick Agnew was commissioner for the shire to the Scottish Parliaments of 1643 and 1644, and he was followed by his son, Sir Andrew, who sat for the shire in 1644, 1645-7 and 1648-9. Their colleague between 1643 and 1648 was Sir James McDowall of Garthland. Only during the royalist resurgence of 1650-1 did the grip of the Agnews and McDowalls slacken, with Sir Robert Adair of Kinhilt and Colonel William Stewart of Castle Stewart being returned by the shire to the Scottish Parliament at Edinburgh. Young, Parliaments of Scot. ii. 801.
The conquest of Scotland by the Cromwellians in 1651-2 brought a mixed response in Wigtownshire and the stewartry of Kirkcudbright. Wigtownshire was one of the few constituencies to accept the 1652 tender of union with enthusiasm. Perhaps guided by McDowall and Agnew and their chosen deputies, the shire declared the union of England and Scotland to be ‘the excellent blessing of God, and most desirable condition for the peace, security and happiness of the whole island’. If orthodox religion could be safeguarded and the forfeiture of estates lifted, they were confident that ‘the people of this land may presently taste of the sweet fruit of this union’. Cromwellian Union ed. Terry, p. xxviii, 37-8. By contrast, the stewartry’s reaction was both divided and divisive. At first, a number of local hard-line covenanters, headed by the Gordons and the influential McLennan clan, rejected the tender of union out of hand, as it went against the Solemn League and Covenant, with its protection of the Kirk against ‘latitude’ in religion, and its obligation ‘to defend the person of the king’. This dissent was countered by two firm declarations of assent by other locals, headed by the once-dominant Maxwells (including the future earl of Nithsdale) and their allies in the Herries and Lindsay families, who denounced the earlier refusal ‘by a part of the gentry assuming to themselves the representation of the whole stewartry’, and claimed the majority accepted the union. Cromwellian Union ed. Terry, 133-4, 139-40, 152-3.
Whether or not the divisions in the stewartry of Kirkcudbright encouraged the English government to rely on the more compliant Wigtownshire lairds is uncertain, but there is no doubt that in the 1650s the region became dominated by a circle centred on McDowall, Agnew and their friends. In 1653, although the regulation of Wigtownshire was in the hands of the gentlemen of the shire, orders for valuations were sent to McDowall. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xliii, f. 12v; xlv, unfol.: 30 May 1653. By 1654 Agnew had been appointed as sheriff of Wigtownshire, in accordance with his hereditary right. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlv, unfol.: 21 Apr. 1654. In February 1655, when the minister of Port Montgomery asked for a review of his valuation, the matter was referred to Agnew, McDowall, Lieutenant-colonel Roger Sawry* (the deputy-governor of Ayr) and the prominent Wigtownshire lawyer, James Dalrymple of Stair. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvi, unfol.: 5 Feb. 1655. The assessment commissioners appointed in December 1655 included Agnew and McDowall, and they were joined by their Wigtownshire allies: Agnew’s Stewart in-laws (including the earl of Galloway himself), Dalrymple, and other three other McDowall lairds (of Logan, Freuch and Gillespie). Acts Parl. Scot. vi. pt. 2, p. 841.
The dominance of McDowall, Agnew and their gang seems to have had an adverse effect on the already divided landowners of the stewartry of Kirkcudbright. The Cromwellian authorities (like the Scottish government before – and since) found the stewartry a puzzling anomaly. Young, Parliaments of Scot. ii. 795. Although it was lumped together with Wigtownshire as a parliamentary constituency, the area came under the jurisdiction of the commissary of Dumfriesshire, and in January 1655 an order was issued making George Maxwell of Munches ‘steward’ (the equivalent of sheriff) of the stewartry. Scot. and Protectorate ed. Firth, 318; Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvi, unfol.: 26 Jan. 1655. The resurrection of this office was supported by the earl of Nithsdale, who arranged for the ‘original writs of the stewartry’ to be delivered to Munches to strengthen his position. W. Fraser, Book of Caerlaverock (2 vols. Edinburgh, 1873), ii. 142. Yet this attempt at self-determination was destined to fail, and there continued to be arguments within the government concerning the status of the stewartry, and whether it should contribute to the assessment payments for Wigtownshire or Dumfriesshire. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvii, unfol.: 6 July, 1 Aug. 1655. In the meantime, the local lairds were rapidly acquiring a reputation for awkwardness, with objections to the tax collection system being voiced in petitions in September and October 1654; in December they demanded to regulate their own taxes. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvi, unfol.: 14 Sept., 9 Oct., 22 Dec. 1654. In August 1655 Monck complained that he needed to consult with the lairds once again over the assessment, as if ‘he should give a positive order before the inhabitants of the stewartry be heard it would occasion another complaint’. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvii, unfol.: 1 Aug. 1655. Uncertainty fostered lawlessness. The Galloway hills had harboured royalist insurgents during the earl of Glencairn’s rebellion in 1653-4, and as late as December 1655 pockets and resistance remained. Scot. and Protectorate ed. Firth, 62, 65, 74, 103, 258; TSP iv. 282. When in the autumn of 1656 the sub-collector for the Wigtownshire assessments, John Sturgeon, ran off with over £500 of the government’s money, he fled to the fastnesses of the stewartry, where efforts to find him were still on-going in February 1658. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlviii, unfol.: 7 Nov. 1656, 9 Feb. 1658. The closeness of the area to Ireland was an additional worry for the government, which in October 1656 issued special orders concerning passes to travel, ‘to prevent any from going away without paying their rents to their landlords and other inconveniences’. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlviii, unfol.: 23 and 24 Oct. 1656.
The deep differences between the shire and the stewartry were reflected in the parliamentary elections in 1654, 1656 and 1659. Under the ordinance for the distribution of Scottish seats, the Wigtownshire constituency was allowed one MP, but the place of election was not specified. A. and O. This may have allowed Agnew, as the presiding sheriff, to manage the election to his own advantage, and it was no surprise that the successful candidate on each occasion was his political partner, Sir James McDowall. The surviving election indenture, for 13 August 1656, provides evidence that some kind of electoral management was being employed. Although this was an all-Scottish occasion, the turn-out was low. C219/45, unfol. Only 14 named electors can be identified, compared with 28 and 33 considered eligible as assessment commissioners in 1655 and 1657 respectively, and almost all of those present at the election came from Wigtownshire. Acts Parl. Scot. vi. pt. 2, p. 841; A. and O. The early date of the election – a week before most other Scottish constituencies – suggests that the sheriff was eager to prevent electors from further afield (and especially from the troublesome stewartry) from getting to the poll. The list of named electors shows that the McDowall interest was present in force, including the lairds of Logan, Freuch and Gillespie, and John Vans (or Vaus) of Barnbarroch, who was related to the McDowalls of Garthland; other trustworthy locals, including the assessment collector, William McGuffock of Alterny, were also present. C 219/45, unfol.; Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xliii, f. 34; Young, Parliaments of Scot. ii. 708. It is likely that the elections in 1654 and 1659 also contained a similar mixture of management and manipulation, with the powerful local interest of the McDowalls and Agnews determining the results. In the circumstances, there was no need for English interference, although McDowall no doubt benefited from his good relations with General Monck. In August 1655 Monck ordered Wigtownshire and the stewartry to ensure McDowall was paid for his attendance in the 1654 Parliament, and this order was endorsed by a letter from Oliver Cromwell* himself. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvii, unfol.: 23 Aug. 1655. In later years, Monck came to trust McDowall further, and in June 1658, shortly before the elections for the third protectorate Parliament, praised him as ‘having been always faithful to his highness’. TSP vii. 199.
Despite the closeness of McDowalls and Agnews to the protectorate regime, the two families emerged at the Restoration relatively unscathed. In the 1661 elections for the Scottish Parliament, Uchtred McDowall of Freuch took over the family interest from Sir James of Garthland (who died in the same year) and William of Garthland sat for the shire in the parliaments after 1689. After a short break, Sir Andrew Agnew of Lochnaw represented the shire in 1665, 1667 and 1669-70; his son was commissioner from 1685 until 1700; and the family retained its hereditary sheriffdom until 1747. Young, Parliaments of Scot. ii. 801; McKerlie, Galloway, i. 34-5. Tensions between Wigtownshire and the stewartry of Kirkcudbright continued after the Restoration. In August 1660 it was reported to the earl of Nithsdale that ‘those of the shire of Wigtown ... are endeavouring to have the stewartry still annexed by virtue of the new writs for this Parliament’, but this attempt was foiled by the local gentry and nobles, who asserted their autonomy. Fraser, Caerlaverock, ii. 148-9, 155. It was perhaps appropriate that the later seventeenth century period the saw a resurgence of the Maxwells, with the lairds of Munches, Orchardtoun and Cardoness taking it in turns to represent the stewartry in the Scottish Parliaments up to 1707. Young, Parliaments of Scot. ii. 795-6.
