Dumfriesshire

Dumfriesshire, between Roxburghshire and the stewartry of Kirkcudbright, was an area of strategic importance, including not only the ports of Dumfries and Annan but also the main roads into the Scottish interior from Carlisle. Historically, the shire was divided into three more-or-less equal parts, named after the three valleys which led from the mountains southwards into the Solway Firth – Eskdale, Annandale and Nithsdale – and each division became the powerbase for an influential earldom in the middle ages. In the early seventeenth century the Maxwell earls of Nithsdale and the Murray earls of Annandale remained influential, and they were joined by the Johnstone earls of Hartfell, Crichton earls of Dumfries and Douglas earls of Queensberry. These aristocratic interests were balanced by a strong gentry class which included the Johnstones, Douglases, Scotts, Fergussons, Griersons and Kirkpatricks. The 1640s saw a split in Dumfriesshire society, with the local peers and such prominent gentlemen as the commissioner for the 1639-41 Parliament, Sir John Charteris of Amisfield, joining the royalist cause, while their covenanting opponents, led by Sir Robert Grierson of Lag, became increasingly militant under the influence of the radical ministers of the south west (later known at the Protesters). The radical covenanters were a close-knit group: the laird of Lag (commissioner in 1639-41, 1643, 1644-7 and 1648) was brother-in-law to two other commissioners – William Fergusson of Craigdarroch (1640) and John Laurie of Maxwelton (1643) – while Robert Fergusson of Craigdarroch (1649-51) was his son-in-law. Young, Parliaments of Scot. ii. 791-2.

The dominance of the radical elements, confirmed after the disastrous defeat of the Scottish army at Dunbar in 1650, was challenged by the Cromwellian invasion of the region after the battle of Worcester in 1651, and a period of damaging instability followed. In the autumn of 1651 a strong force of English troops was sent into Dumfriesshire to put down resistance, but the ringleaders (including the Fergussons of Craigdarroch) escaped. Scot. and Commonwealth, ed. Firth, 320-2. Although the gentry of Dumfriesshire accepted the tender of union in 1652, the local clergy were violently opposed, and the synod of Dumfries denounced the whole process in August 1652. Cromwellian Union, ed. Terry, 30-1, 39-41; Dow, Cromwellian Scot. 60. In 1653-4 the royalist rising under the earl of Glencairn attracted a large degree of support from Dumfriesshire. The English commander-in-chief, Robert Lilburne*, was concerned not by residual royalism in the area, but by the refusal of the Stuarts’ enemies to act against them: as he told Oliver Cromwell*, ‘I thought these parts would not have stirred, many gentlemen affirming the same, but there is little truth in most of them’. Scot. and Protectorate, ed. Firth, 65. In May 1654 Lilburne’s successor, George Monck*, described Dumfriesshire as ‘the only troublesome part on this side of the Firth [of Forth]’. Scot. and Protectorate, 103. The recalcitrance of the Protesters and their allies caused serious problems for the English government, which preferred to work with amenable local elements, especially in an area such as Dumfriesshire, which had only a small military garrison (at Dumfries) and was otherwise dependent on the distant garrison of Ayr or the forces across the border at Carlisle. At first, the local administration was put into the hands of outsiders, including the deputy sheriff, Captain William Greene, but by the autumn of 1654 the assessments were so far in arrears that the collector was sacked, there were continual complaints from locals at the high-handed behaviour of the commissary, and the commander at Dumfries found them unwilling to provide fuel and grazing for his troops. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvi, unfol.: 14 Sept., 14 Oct., 30 Oct. 1654; W. Fraser, Annandale Family Bk. (2 vols. Edinburgh, 1894), ii. 36.

In response, Monck came to rely on a former royalist, the 2nd earl of Hartfell (James Johnstone*), who was allowed to police the shire, and became the spokesman for the local landowners over such matters as assessments during the same period. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvi, unfol.: 23 Sept., 14 Oct. 1654. With Hartfell in the ascendant, the power of the Protesters, already diminished by the death of Sir Robert Grierson of Lag in 1652, went into decline. Although the synod of Dumfries was given government permission to meet, in the summer of 1655 the local commander, Captain Grimsditch, had to protect its meetings from being ‘disturbed by disorderly people’ led by the earl of Queensberry’s factor, George Blair of Garroch, and this suggests that the royalist elements were feeling more confident. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvi, unfol.: 4-5 Apr. 1655; xlvii, unfol.: 20 June, 12 July, 7, 8 and 21 Aug., 22 Oct. 1655. This factional shift is confirmed by a letter from the gentlemen of Dumfriesshire, asking that James Crichton of St Leonards (son of the royalist earl of Dumfries) should be their new sheriff, and Monck’s instructions to the judges recommending Crichton ‘as a fit person to be sheriff of the shire’. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlvii, unfol.: 20 July 1655. Crichton’s appointment was followed (in September 1656) by that of a trusted Scot from outwith the shire, William Ross* of Drumgarland, as commissary. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlviii, unfol.: 8 Sept. 1656.

The appointment of former royalists and Cromwellian loyalists created something of a balance in local government, as can be seen in March 1656, when the justices of the peace active in the shire included the earls of Hartfell and Nithsdale as well as men associated with the Protesters including Sir John Grierson of Lag (although he seems to have lacked some his father’s zeal) and Robert Fergusson of Craigdarroch, although others were ‘not so clear to take the said oath, at least at first. Fraser, Annandale, ii.38-9, 305-6. This line-up suggests that old adversaries were now willing to work side-by-side, albeit under the watchful eye of Captain Grimsditch. In October 1656 those appointed to issue certificates for passes to Ireland from Dumfriesshire – and hence those most trusted in the shire – were the earls of Hartfell and Annandale, James Crichton and William Ross, who joined the laird of Lag and Sir William Douglas of Kilhead. Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlviii, frontispiece (23 Oct. 1656). These appointments suggest that the government had at last managed a settlement of sorts in Dumfriesshire. The lists of assessment commissioners appointed in December 1655 and June 1657 also show this trend, with officials and English commanders and former royalists such as Hartfell, balancing adherents of the Protester faction. Acts Parl. Scot. vi. pt. 2, p. 839; A. and O.; Scot. and Protectorate, ed. Firth, 311. Evidence of which magistrates were active during the last years of the protectorate also suggests something of a compromise had been effected: Hartfell and his kinsman James Johnstone of Corhead worked with Kilhead in February 1658, while Lag and Craigdarroch were granted passes to allow them to fulfil their duties on the bench in February 1657 and July 1658 respectively. NRS, JC26/25, loose pprs.; Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke xlviii, unfol.: 24 Feb. 1657, 5 July 1658.

In the parliamentary elections for Dumfriesshire, the government reaped the reward from its policy of divide and rule. Under the ordinance for the distribution of Scottish seats, the shire was allowed a single MP. A. and O. In 1654 the earl of Hartfell was returned with government backing. In 1656 there seems to have been the threat of a backlash from the Protesters, which caused the president of the Scottish council, Lord Broghill (Roger Boyle*) to intervene. As he told John Thurloe*, ‘there was some design at Dumfries there to choose one I did not like’, and he called on Hartfell (‘the leading man there’) to support the government’s candidate for the shire, Judge George Smyth*. TSP v. 295. Hartfell duly attended the election on 20 August, along with at least three other Johnstones – including the lairds of Corhead and Elschieschields – in what looks like a show of strength by the surname. They were joined by three other men with royalist connections: Robert Kirkpatrick of Closeburn and his kinsmen Robert Kirkpatrick of Auldgirth and John Maxwell of Cowhill. Those with Protester associations were poorly represented: the moderate laird of Lag was present, but the Fergussons, Douglases and Scotts were notable by their absence, and it was ominous few of those named as assessment commissioners or justices of the peace in the same period were among the 12 signatories to the indenture. C219/45, unfol. The return of Smyth therefore seems to have been achieved only through the abstention of a large number of eligible voters, and the lack of Protesters may not have been a coincidence. It is not known whether something similar took place in the elections for Richard Cromwell’s* Parliament in 1659, when the Dumfriesshire commissary, William Ross, was returned; but it may be significant that his main patron was George Monck, and that he was no friend of the Protesters.

After the Restoration, the former royalists who had collaborated with the Cromwellian regime were able to consolidate their position. The earl of Hartfell was rewarded for his earlier service, and created earl of Annandale (in succession to the now defunct Murray line) in 1661; James Crichton of St Leonards was elected as commissioner to the Scottish Parliament of 1661-3. His fellow commissioner was a former Protester, Robert Fergusson of Craigdarroch, but Craigdarroch was exceptional in retaining his status after 1660. Many of the Dumfriesshire Protesters, including members of the Fergusson, Douglas and Scott families, were fined for their earlier resistance to the Stuarts, regardless of their consistent refusal to fall in with the plans of the Cromwellian ‘usurpers’. Young, Parliaments of Scot. ii. 791-2; Acts Parl. Scot. vii. 423-4. These families remained true to the covenanting cause, but the Griersons of Lag soon fell by the wayside, with Sir Robert Grierson, the 1st baronet, becoming notorious as a persecutor of the covenanters in the 1680s. Young, Parliaments of Scot. i. 302-3.