Dispute with Gourgaud

November 2 [1827].—I was a little bilious to-night—no wonder. Had sundry letters without any power of giving my mind to answer them—one about Gourgaud with his nonsense. I shall not trouble my head more on that score.

It’s easy to see how General Gaspard Gourgaud might upset one’s stomach, as Scott complains in his journal.  John Gibson Lockhart, in his “Memoirs of the Life of Sir Walter Scott”, provides substantial detail on the dispute between Gourgaud and Scott, which had been brewing since 1826, after the publication of Scott’s “Life of Napoleon Buonaparte”..  Per Lockhart, ‘About the close of August [1827] Sir Walter's Diary is chiefly occupied with an affair which, as the reader of the previous chapter is aware, did not come altogether unexpectedly on him. Among the documents laid before him in the Colonial Office, when he was in London at the close of 1826, were some which represented one of Buonaparte's attendants at St. Helena, General Gourgaud, as having been guilty of gross unfairness, giving the English Government private information that the Emperor's complaints of ill-usage were utterly unfounded, and yet then, and afterwards, aiding and assisting the delusion in France as to the harshness of Sir Hudson Lowe's conduct towards his captive…’

Gourgaud sent an angry letter which was published in the Edinburgh Weekly Journal.  He eventually came to London (from France), and all signs and speculation pointed toward a duel.  Scott responded with a strongly worded letter of his own.  

‘TO THE EDITOR OP THE EDINBURGH WEEKLY JOURNAL.

Abbotsford, September 14, 1827.

Sir, — I observed in the London papers which I received yesterday, a letter from General Gourgaud, which I beg you will have the goodness to reprint, with this communication and the papers accompanying it.

It appears that the General is greatly displeased, because, availing myself of formal official documents, I have represented him, in my Life of Buonaparte, as communicating to the British Government and the representatives of others of the Allied Powers, certain statements in matter, which he seems at present desirous to deny or disavow, though in what degree, or to what extent, he has not explicitly stated.

Upon these grounds, for I can discover no other, General Gourgaud has been pleased to charge me, in the most intemperate terms, as the agent of a plot, contrived by the late British Ministers, to slander and dishonor him. I will not attempt to imitate the General either in his eloquence or his invective, but confine myself to the simple fact, that his accusation against me is as void of truth as it is of plausibility. I undertook, and carried on, the task of writing the Life of Napoleon Buonaparte, without the least intercourse with, or encouragement from, the Ministry of the time, or any person connected with them; nor was it until my task was very far advanced, that I asked and obtained permission from the Earl Bathurst, then Secretary for the Colonial Department, to consult such documents as his office afforded, concerning the residence of Napoleon at St. Helena. His Lordship's liberality, with that of Mr. Hay, the Under Secretary, permitted me, in the month of October last, personal access to the official records, when I inspected more than sixteen quarto volumes of letters, from which I made memoranda or extracts at my own discretion, unactuated by any feeling excepting the wish to do justice to all parties…’

Scott had the weight of verifiable documents on his side, and Gourgard never effectively responded to Scott’s points.  The dispute subsided without bloodshed.

Earthquake in Selkirkshire

With the horrible human suffering that has engulfed Haiti and Chile over the last few weeks, it's easy to overlook the fact that earthquakes can and have occurred in every country.  It's perhaps a false sense of security that engulfs us on the east coast of the US, and in Scotland.  The Sherriff of Selkirkshire, Walter Scott, no doubt felt the same.

But earthquakes are not completely unknown in the Borderlands, and one relatively large one would have been within the living memory of many of Scott's older friends and relatives.  On March 1, 1728, one struck near Selkirk.

As reported in the Edinburgh Weekly Journal of March 4, 1728:

"On Friday the first of March current, between 4 and 5 in the Morning, we felt in this Place a very sensible Shock of an Earthquake.  It came from the North East, and went directly South West...It lasted according to some, one Minute, but most of my acquaintances say, near three Minutes...There have none suffered by it, but there was a strange Dancing among the Plates Glasses, &c..."

Also significant in the 18th century were earthquakes at Leadhills, in 1746 and 1749.

Scott experienced his first earthquake while at Malta, on December 10, 1831.  From Scott's Journal:

"...The last night we were at Malta we experienced a rude shock of an earthquake, which alarmed me, though I did not know what it was. It was said to foretell that the ocean, which had given birth to Graham's Island, had, like Pelops, devoured its own offspring, and we are told it is not now visible, and will be, perhaps, hid from those who risk the main; but as we did not come near its latitude we cannot say from our own knowledge that the news is true..."

Second Letter of Malachi Malagrowther

Walter Scott's first letter under the pseudonym Malachi Malagrowther focused primarily on the economic issues inherent in England's proposed banking reforms in the aftermath of the Panic of 1925/26.  Specifically, Malagrowther argued against eliminating small Scottish banking notes (under L5), which provided the credit on which the Scottish economy ran.  The second Malagrowther letter was more a call to patriotism in resisting the changes.

"...Let every body of electors, from Dumfries to Dingwall, instruct its representative upon their own sentiments, and upon the conduct which they desire he should hold during this great national crisis; and let the Administration be aware, that if any of our members should desert the public cause on this occasion, they are not like to have the benefit of their implicit homage in the next Parliament..."

England's proposed uniformity in banking rules is viewed by Malagrowther as an intrusion on Scottish rights:

"...do not let us, like our ancestors at Falkirk, fall to jealousies among ourselves, when heart, and voice, and hand, should be united against the foreign enemy. I was about to erase the last word; but let it remain, with this explanation---that the purpose of this invasion of our rights is acknowledged to be kind and friendly; but as the measure is unauthorised by justice, conducted without regard to the faith of treaties, and contrary to our national privileges, we cannot but term the enterprise a hostile one. When Henry VIII. despatched a powerful invading army to compel the Scots to give the hand of their young Queen Mary to his son Edward, an old Scottish nobleman shrewdly observed, ``He might like the match well enough, but could not brook the mode of wooing.'' ...

Malagrowther points out to Ireland that she should unite with Scotland in opposition to the banking regulations:

"...Patrick, my warm-hearted and shrewd friend, how should you like this receipt for domestication, should it travel your way? You have your own griefs, and your own subjects of complaint,---are you willing to lose the power of expressing them with energy? You have only to join with the Ministry on this debate---you have only to show in what light reverence you are willing to hold the articles of an Union not much above a century old, and then you will have time to reflect at leisure upon the consequences of such an example. In such a case, when your turn comes (and come, be sure, it will,) you will have signed your own sentence. You will have given the fatal precedent to England of the annihilation of a solemn treaty of incorporating Union, and afforded the representatives of Scotland vindictive reasons for retaliating upon you the injury which you aided England in inflicting upon us. Whereas---step this way, Pat ---and see there is nobody listening---why should not you and we have a friendly understanding, and assist each other, as the weaker parties, against any aggressions, which may be made upon either of us, ``for uniformity's sake?''..."

And, Malagrowther reinforces aspects of his first letter, calling the legality of England's proposal into question:

"...I have stated in my former Letter, that the system respecting the currency, which is now about to be abrogated, has been practised in Scotland for about one hundred and thirty years, with the greatest advantage to the country and inhabitants. I have also shown from the Treaty of Union, that it cannot be altered, unless the preliminary is established to the conviction of Parliament, that the alteration is for the =evident advantage= of the subjects in Scotland. No advantage, evident or remote, has ever been hinted at, so far as Scotland is concerned: it has only been said, that it will be advantageous to England, to whose measures Scotland must be conformable, as a matter of course, though in the teeth of the article stipulated by our Commissioners, and acceded to by those of England, at the time of the Union. I have therefore gained my cause in any fair Court..."

First Letter of Malachi Malagrowther

In 1826, Walter Scott undertook to write a series of letters under the pseudonym Malachi Malagrowther.  The Malagrowther letters railed against England's levelling of banking regulations in Scotland to conform with reforms being enacted in England as fallout to the Panic of 1825/26.  A draft of his first missive was submitted to James Ballantyne on February 19, 1826.  The letter was dated February 21, 1826, being published on the 22nd in Ballantyne's "Edinburgh Weekly Journal".  In this first letter, Malagrowther intimates that the Scottish banking system is fundamentally different from England's, that England's system promoted speculation in risky commodities to increase profits, and that the medicine required in England would be harmful to the sound Scotch system.

One of the main reforms proposed by England was to eliminate notes under L5.  Scott describes a country (Scotland) that relies on acceptance of these very notes for its functioning.  Scottish banks, argues Malagrowther, function since "...the notes, and especially the small notes, which they distribute, entirely supply the demand for a medium of currency; and that system has so completely expelled gold from the country of Scotland, that you never by chance espy a guinea there, unless in the purse of an accidental stranger, or in the coffers of these Banks themselves."

The strength of the Scottish banking system, Malagrowther indicates, rests on three main points.  First: "In Scotland, almost all Banking Companies consist of a considerable number of persons, many of them men of landed property, whose landed estates, with the burdens legally affecting them, may be learned from the records...".  In contrast: "In England...the number of the partners engaged in a banking concern cannot exceed five; and...yet no one can learn, without incalculable trouble, the real value of [the partners']  land..."  Essentially, Scott is arguing that Scottish banks are better capitalized, as a rule.

Malagrowther's second argument is that "the circulation of the Scottish bank-notes is free and unlimited; an advantage arising from the superior degree of credit...", while "those of the English Banking Companies seldom extend beyond a very limited horizon...Even the most creditable provincial notes never approach London in a free tide...".  Here Scott refers to trust in the system, which is stronger in Scotland due to it's verifiable source of wealth (landed estates). 

Malagrowther's third argument hits at the heart of the cause of the Banking Panic, which impacted English banks, not Scottish.  "...the profession of provincial Bankers in England is limited in its regular profits, and uncertain in its returns, to a degree unknown in Scotland; and is, therefore, more apt to be adopted in the south by men...who sink in mines or other hazardous speculations...".  One might add CDO's, and other derivative instruments in today's environment.

To support Malagrowther's arguments against standardization of banking regulation, Scott draws several analogies, designed to highlight that what is good in one situation may not fit another.  For example: "I will not insist farther on such topics, for I dare say, that these apparent enormities in principle are, in England, where they have operation, modified and corrected in practice by circumstances unknown to me; so that, in passing judgment on them, I may myself fall into the error I deprecate, of judging of foreign laws without being aware of all the premises. Neither do I mean that we should struggle with illiberality against any improvements which can be borrowed from English principle. I would only desire that such ameliorations were adopted, not merely because they are English, but because they are suited to be assimilated with the laws of Scotland, and lead, in short, to her evident utility [this phrasing derives from the Treaty of Union of 1707, which Malagrowhter references in the letter] , and this on the principle, that in transplanting a tree, little attention need be paid to the character of the climate and soil from which it is brought, although the greatest care must be taken that those of the situation to which it is transplanted are fitted to receive it. It would be no reason for planting mulberry-trees in Scotland, that they luxuriate in the south of England. There is sense in the old proverb, ``Ilk land has its ain lauch"."