Lord Tweedmouth
In this interview with Lord Tweedmouth (proprietor of Guisachan, Beauly), he mentions evicting John Macdonald for selling whisky. He subsequently moved to Invermoriston.
KINGUSSIE, INVERNESS-SHIRE, MONDAY, OCTOBER 15. INVERNESS.
Present.
Lord NAPIER and ETTRICK, K.T., Chairman.
Sir KENNETH S. MACKENZIE, Bart.
DONALD CAMERON, Esq, of Lochiel, M.P.
C. FRASER-MACKINTOSH, Esq., M.P.
Sheriff NICOLSON, LL.D.
Lord TWEEDMOUTH, Proprietor of Guisachan, Beauly (62) - examined.
42942. The Chairman.—I believe you desire to make a statement in Lord consequence of something that was stated at Inverness. —I do.
42943. Will you have the goodness to do so?—It is my wish to offer a few remarks in reply to the evidence given at Inverness on Friday last by Mr Colin Chisholm—evidence affecting Strath Glass, and the management of the Guisachan property during the last thirty years. That evidence I read on Saturday at Guisachan. I could have wished that Mr Colin Chisholm had given me some notice of his intention to attack the management of the Guisachan property. I think he would have shown not only more courtesy towards myself, but also a greater desire to place the whole truth before the Royal Commissioners, as had he done so I should have been prepared to bring forward witnesses to contradict his statements— for instance, Alexander Stewart, who was my manager at Guisachan from 1855 to 1864; also Hugh Fraser, who has been on the estate for fifty years—he is a son of one of the old crofters; also two Macdonalds, William and Archie, sons of an old crofter on the property; and I feel quite confident that those men would have borne testimony to the consideration and liberality and kindness shown to every inhabitant of the property at Guisachan. I at once say that Mr Chisholm was entirely correct in stating that I, when I took possession of Guisachan in 1855, found sixteen tenants. There were two large sheep farmers and fourteen small crofters; and he was also quite correct in saying that not one of those sixteen is now remaining with land on the property. But admitting that, I deny entirely that Mr Chisholm was right in any of the details he gave, or right in saying that those men were evicted. The only one instance that could bear the colour of an eviction was the case of John Macdonald, the innkeeper. John Macdonald's house was little better than a bothy. He had some land, and he paid £15 a year of rental. His sale of whisky was very considerable, and there were constant rows and constant brawls between the great number of workmen I was employing at that time and also among the labouring population of the place. I told Macdonald that unless he could dispense with his licence for selling whisky he would have to remove at the expiry of his lease, which was in 1864, nine years after my coming to the place. Macdonald said it was impossible he could make a living without selling whisky. He left the property at the expiry of his lease in 1861, and settled at Invermorriston. If Mr Chisholm calls that an eviction, I do not myself, but it is the only case that would bear the smallest colour of an eviction of any kind or sort.