An occasional series of articles gleaned from research into my NE
Scotland ancestors. Lots of stories and odd snippets. I hope you find
them as interesting as I do...
Scottish Notes & Queries, April, 1892
Fisher Serfdom in
the North -
It
is
well known that there were slaves in the coal
mines and salt works
of the south of Scotland
long after serfdom or neyfship as a universal institution had finally,
disappeared, and that, previous act of 1775, the workmen
engaged in these industries
were as completely
adscriptilii glebce, and
under the power of their masters, as were
the agricultural serfs of mediaeval times.
It
is not so generally well known perhaps,
that, only a century earlier, the fishermen of the
Aberdeenshire and North-Eastern coasts were in a precisely similar
condition, and that it was not till
1698 that the highest legal tribunal in Scotland, the Court of Session,
pronounced definitely against the legality of the serfdom that
inveterate custom had imposed upon them.
The
information regarding this stray relic of
Privy Council records for 1684. On April 22nd that year the Earl of
Erroll presented a peti
tion to the Council for a warrant to reclaim two of his fishermen, by
name Alexander Brodie and Anchrew Buchlay, who had "fled away from
him without leave to his damage and prejudice." In his petition the
Earl stated that it was the universal custom of the north country for
fisher men "to be tied and obliged to the same servitude and
service that the coal-hewers and salters are in the south," and
further, that it was "not lawful for any man whatsoever to resett,
harbour, or entertein the fishers or boatmen who belong to
another." Poor Brodie and Buchlay had, of course, no friends at the
Council, and, equally as a matter of course, the Earl's petition was
immediately granted, no question being raised as to the lawfulness of
his Lordship's demands.
Some
twelve years later, however, on July 31st, 1696, the question came
before the Court of Session in the form of a lawsuit between two
Aberdeenshire proprietors, the " Laird of Woodney" (Udny) and
Forbes of Foveran. According to the report of the case in Fountainhall
(Vol. I., P. 732), " Reid, Beverley, and some fishermen upon Don
having entered into a tack with the Laird of Woodney, they were also
claimed by Forbes of Foveran, on this ground, that they were born in his
land, and so were as much glebae addicti, and astricted to live there as coaliers and salters." The
judges seem to have found the case one of novelty and considerable
difficulty, for, the report goes on to say, on the ground that it was
"alleged that there was a general custom that had prevailed in the
north astricting these men to the ground where they served, they
superseded to give answer till they had inquired further thereanent."
Nowadays
it is much the custom for the non-legal population to complain
grievously of the law's delays, but these delays are nothing now to what
they were in the seventeenth century, and it is not surprising,
therefore, to find that the case fell asleep for nearly two years, the
liberty of Reid and his friends hanging all the while in the balance.
The result, however, was satisfactory. Lord Fountainhall himself reported
the case to the Court (Vol. I., P. 825), and, after apparently a good
deal of argument, "the Lords finding there was no law astricting
fishers to the ground where they were born, and that the custom was not
general, but only in some particular places, they condemned it as a corruptela
and unlawful, and tending to introduce slavery contrary to the
principles of the Christian religion and the mildness of our government:
and found the fishers free to engage with whom they pleased."
In
this way the serfdom of the fishers disappeared. That of the colliers
and salters having received some legislative sanction previous to the
decision in Woodney's case, could not be got rid of so easily, It had to
be abolished by the legislature itself by the statutes already
mentioned.
