Site icon Random Scottish History

26th of May

St Quadratus, Bishop of Athens, 2nd century. St Eleutheriuss, pope, martyr, 192. St Oduvald, abbot of Melrose, 698. St Philip Neri, 1595.

Born. – Charles Duke of Orleans, 1391; Dr Michael Attmuller, eminent German physician, 1644, Leipzig.
Died. – Thomas Southern, dramatist, 1746; James Burnet, Lord Monboddo, 1799, Edinburgh; Francis Joseph Haydn, musical composer, 1809, Grumpendorff, Vienna; Jacques Lafitte, eminent French banker and political character, 1844, Paris.

On this Day in Other Sources.

The time was now fast approaching, when the Parliament was to meet, after its prorogation, in January, for the dispatch of various matters of great weight. The Queen feared, that she should be pressed, at this Parliament, in matters of religion. The expected Parliament assembled, at length, on the 26th of May 1563. The Queen came to Parliament, the same day, in her robes, and was crowned: The Duke carried the crown: Argyle the sceptre; and Murray the sword. The Queen delivered a speech to Parliament, in her native language. On the same day, she gave a feast to the ladies of Scotland, as we learn from her household book. She is said to have been present, at the forfeitures of Huntley, Sutherland, and many of their friends, on whatever proofs.

– Life of Mary, pp.78-98.

Originally there appears to have been a herd for the cows and a separate herd for the calves. In 1579 there is an order of the town council by which “Matho Wilsone is maid and constitut calf hird, and is ordanit to have vjd (a halfpenny) for ilk calf, and his meit daily about, or ellis xijd (a penny) for ilk melteth [each meal] gif thai failzie and to be poyndit thairfoir.”1 Perhaps the calves were pastured on the Green. There was certainly a house for the herd there, situated near the site of Nelson’s Monument. 

– Old Glasgow, pp.175-181. 

1  26th May, 1579.

On the 26th day of the same month [May, 1590], the Danes that had accompanied the Queen [there], take their leave of their majesties, (who bestowed many jewels and rich presents on them, according to their several qualities,) and took ship for Denmark.

– Historical Works, pp.340-416.

Dr. William Forbes, who died Bishop of Edinburgh, another of the Aberdeen doctors, was more immediately connected with Marischal College, having received the beginning of his education there, and being afterwards its Principal. “He was,” says the parson of Rothiemay, “one of the learnedest men, and one of the most eloquent preachers of is age, or that ever Aberdeen, the nursery of so many great spirits, ever brought forthe.”1

– Sketches, pp.254-324.

1  In the Presbytery of Aberdeen, 26th May 1642. He died in 1659, in the ninety-fifth year of his age.

   … The endeavours of the Scots members in the House of Commons for easing, their countrymen of part of the malt tax having proved ineffectual, they had several private meetings with the Scots peers sitting in Parliament; and, laying aside all invidious distinctions, consulted together how to redress their grievances. On the 26th of May they deputed four of their number, viz. the Duke of Argyll, the Earl of Mar, Mr. Lockhart, and Mr. Cockburn, who by their order attended the Queen, and, by word of mouth, humbly remonstrated to her Majesty, ‘that their countrymen bore with great impatience the violation of some articles of the union, and that the laying such an insupportable burden as the malt tax upon them, was like to raise their discontents to such a height as to prompt them to declare the union dissolved.’ To this unexpected verbal remonstrance the Queen answered, ‘This was a precipitate resolution, and she wished they might not have reason to repent it; but, however, she would endeavour to make all things easy…’

– Morning Chronicle, Monday 17th July, 1843.

– Treaty of Union Articles, 1800-1850.


Edinburgh, May 25, 1882.  

   SIR, – Your correspondent ‘The Treaty of Union’ has asked a most startling question, viz. – ‘Does not Disestablishment mean the abolition of the Treaty of Union?’ I reply most emphatically that it does. Some sentimental people imagine that the Treaty of 1707 is an antiquated document. and that it has nothing to do with the present relations of Scotland and England, that no one would think of disturbing the peace of the British Empire by appealing to it. Never was there a greater mistake made than to indulge in such vain fancies. Law deals with facts, not with sentiment. Probably, however, some people would not object to a dissolution of the present union, and therefore press for Disestablishment. 

   Looking at the matter from a purely philosophical point of view, one might be tempted to say – ‘Since England was the first party to put her foot through the Treaty in 1712 (five years after it was signed), she has no reason to complain if Scotland administers the finishing kick.’ This, however, is a matter of opinion. – I am, &c. 

A. N. S. M.”  

– Scotsman, Friday 26th May, 1882.

– Treaty of Union Articles, 1875-1900.

Exit mobile version