St John of Moutier and Chinon, priest and confessor, 6th century. St Ladislas I. King of Hungary, confessor, 1095.
Born. – Louis XII. (‘the Just’) of France, 1462, Blois; Charles IX. of France, 1550, St Germain; Charles XII. of Sweden, 1682.
Died. – Jean Rotrou, most eminent French dramatist before Corneille, 1650; Christian Heinecken, prodigy of precocious learning, 1725, Lübeck; Abbé de Chaulieu, French Poet, 1740; Runjeet Singh, chief of Lahore, 1839, Lahore; John Murray, eminent publisher, 1843, London.
On this Day in Other Sources.
Both the abbey and the ancient palace [of Scone] were spoiled and burned on Monday, June 27th, 1559, by a motley mob from Perth and Dundee, actuated, some by aversion to Popery, some by private resentment, and some by the hope of booty.
– Scotland Illustrated, pp.11-13.
There is satisfactory evidence of a plot, by Murray against Huntley; but none for a plot, by Huntley against Murray.
While Murray was still doubtful, what measure he should adopt, for effectuating his purpose, an incident occurred, which supplied him with a pretext. On the 27th of June 1562, a rencounter happened, on the street of Edinburgh, between Sir John Gordon, Huntley’s son, and Ogilvie of Cardal, about their private affairs, when Ogilvie was severely wounded. Sir John, and the other persons, concerned in this outrage, were, immediately, imprisoned, by the magistrates. Here, was a breach of the peace, and the guilty were restrained, from committing any further violence. But, the Earl of Mar, catching the occasion, to promote his designs on the earldom of Moray, hastened from Stirling to Edinburgh: where he directed additional coercion against Sir John Gordon, who seeing a mere breach of the peace taken up, as an important affair of government, made his escape, from the resentment of Mar. This was considered, as an aggravation of the first offence, and as evidence of a treasonable design of Sir John, and his father, against the Queen, and her minion. Here, then, was a sufficient ground, for Mar, and Maitland, to work upon the Queen’s credulity, to believe, that Huntley, and his son, entertained traitorous designs against the Queen, and Mar.
– Life of Mary, pp.62-77.
The idea of a New Register House was actively urged by James Earl of Morton, who died in 1774, and who was Lord Clerk Register. Seeing that it was vain to hope for any direct government grant, he obtained £12,000 out of the money accruing from the forfeited estates of the Jacobites, and laid it at interest till 1765, when Robert Adam, architect, and then M.P. for Kinross, having made a design of the present building, it was completely approved of, and on the 27th of June, 1774, the foundation stone was laid, under a royal salute of cannon, by Lord Frederick Campbell, Lord Register of Scotland, in presence of the magistrates, the judges of the Court of Session and Exchequer, Thomas Millar of Barskimming, Lord Justice Clerk, and James Montgomery, Lord Advocate, the three trustees appointed by the crown to see the design put in execution.
– Old and New Edinburgh, pp.364-372.
In the Commons, after some spirited complaints of the confusion of our Army Departments, to which the only answer seems to be, that the DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE and LORD PANMURE are on excellent terms, the eternal Map question came up. For seventy years have the authorities been mapping the kingdoms, first on the scale of an inch to a mile, then six inches, then twenty-six inches and three-quarters. This last was in Scotland, where the landowners made a job of it, getting perfect plans of their estates at the national expense. So much did the Lairds value this, that Mr. Punch knows of one who actually subscribed £1500 to get his part of the country mapped early. Well, a good map is a good thing, but the Scotch job was stopped tonight, and Government beaten by 10. In revenge, a Scotch Member tried to stop the English survey, but this ebullition in spite found only 22 supporters against 290 opponents. – June 27, 1857, p.256.
“A very strong movement has set in against Mr Cross’s Lord Clerk Register Bill and his Under Secretary for Scotland Bill. The latter is perhaps the less offensive, although it would tend to reduce the Lord Advocate to the level of a law officer and nothing more. But the proposal to abolish the existence (or rather the salary) of an ancient officer, whose usefulness no one questions, and whose position is one of the provisions of the Treaty Of Union, has given much offence. The Register Office cannot exist without a head, and that a vigorous one. It is true that the leadership, as in the case of Lord Dalhousie, has often been no more than nominal, but the abuse of an office is a reason for reform, not for abolition. There are many important public duties, many conflicting interests, and a large staff of responsible offices which give abundant employment to a man of energy and honour. That abuses exist in the House, mainly in the fact that so many persons actually serving the Crown have been on frivolous grounds denied the status of Crown servants, no one seeks to deny. But an office which, after paying all charges, yields a surplus in fees of £18,000 a-year need not be robbed of a salary for its responsible head. And by existing Acts, any surplus should go to reduce the fees, not to salary a new Under Secretary for the Home Department. And seeing that abuse above referred to has been prolonged and intensified under a Liberal régime, one might almost have expected that, out of more policy alone, the present Government would have striven to allay discontent by reforming the abuse, instead of intensifying discontent through an ill-considered bit of economy. It is not thought likely that, after the vigorous exposure of the wrong side of the proposal made by Mr Fraser as Dean of Faculty, the Home Secretary will hesitate to include his bills in the first massacre of the innocents.”
– Inverness Courier, 27th June, 1878.
– Treaty of Union Articles, 1875-1900.