Posts tagged ‘Darien’

November 11, 2019

What is mine is mine and what is yours is also mine: Scotland in union

Flag of the Company of Scotland trading to Africa and the Indies

How England colonised Scotland.

A report out this week is critical of Westminster’s handling of the economy and its impact on Scotland – disastrous. It argues that Scotland’s potential for wealth is – big – but the actuality in a decidedly unequal union is – dodgy.

For fifty years we have watched as £zillions of revenue from oil and gas taken out of Scottish waters flows downhill to London to reduce the size of the national debt, support tax breaks and financial incentives for oil and gas multinationals, enable eye-wateringly costly building projects and infrastructure to boost the economy of London.

Tax revenue from the UK’s offshore industries, 90% of which lie off Scotland, could have been (should have been) designated as Scottish revenue. It wasn’t. Instead Westminster dreamed up a make-believe place which they called the UK Continental Shelf. This meant Scotland could not claim oil and gas fields as hers because they were situated in Wonderland aka the UK Continental Shelf.

At one fell swoop the enormous wealth that might have made such a difference to Scotland’s scattered, much of it rural, population – to the provision of health and social care, education, transport was whipped away. Imagine if anything like the money squandered on the bottomless pit that is London’s cross-rail project or HS2 had been invested around Scotland – proper roads and choice of transport in the Highlands – all you can do is imagine for it never happened. Wealth is what goes to southeast England, from Scotland.

Just to be sure that uppity Scots would not benefit from Britain’s offshore bonanza Labour Prime Minister, Tony Blair, picked up an HB pencil and drew a line through Scottish waters re-allocating a chunk to England – exemplifying that age-old practice of the coloniser to annexe territory wherever and whenever because they have the powers to do so. Westminster must have been gratified at how easy it was to achieve. That sort of thing used to cause wars.

It is one thing to allow fish taken from Scottish waters to be regarded as Scottish but not highly valuable oil and gas. No ifs no buts Westminster ignored protests from Scotland because despite the union of the UK being described as a union of equals it isn’t. The UK is England’s little empire. Scotland is a mere colony; there to provide the mother country with resources not to benefit directly from them.

Scotland’s waters

Imagine the scene – an office deep inside Westminster where a bourach of suited men with dandruff on their shoulders leaning in over a large table – highly polished by a migrant worker on minimum wage – concocting the means by which they could appropriate Scotland’s cash cow like a bunch of 20th century border reivers.

Of course the colony of Scotland was thrown a crumb in the form of per capita portion of the revenues but as England’s population is ten times that of Scotland you don’t have to be a financial wizard to realise which of the equal partners of the union got the lion’s share.

The plotters in London weren’t even very good at getting the best value out of hydrocarbons. A simple comparison with Norway which virtually mirrors the UK’s oil and gas industries reveals quite astonishingly that the Norwegians generated more than double the revenue of the UK on every single barrel of oil. These civil servants and politicians managed not only to screw Scotland but screw themselves into the bargain. Only just not as much.

Back in 2014 at the time of the independence referendum Scotland was in the unusual position of being a producer of one of the world’s most lucrative products and yet the message coming out from the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats was this was a bad thing for once oil was gone it was gone and then where would Scotland be? Same place England would be. And as the silent and largely forgotten partner in the precious union dependent on crumbs tossed northwards from London, that’s where. Since Scotland has a tendency to see Nordic countries as fellow-nations it is highly likely that had Scotland been in receipt of her own oil and gas revenues Scots would be cushioned from the worst times through a Norwegian type oil fund that could have eased the transfer from hydrocarbons to renewable.

There is no question that Westminster is responsible for severely damaging Scotland’s economy. If what came out of the North Sea had been plastic waste Westminster would have let it alone instructing Scotland to deal with its own problem but it wasn’t waste it was wealth. Like the EU farming funds meant for Scottish farmers Westminster grabbed oil and gas revenues for itself. That’s the thing about colonists, remember – what’s theirs is theirs and what is the colony’s is also theirs – if it is valuable.

This is simply state organised abuse. You know the scenario where an abusive husband insists his abused wife stays with him because she keeps getting beaten up – and he’ll protect her. There’s an Eric Bogle song, Glasgow Lullaby about a woman who keeps taking a beating from her drunken man and never leaves –

Oh my God, it’s a weary, weary life
Who wid be a drinkin’ man’s wife
Who wid thole a’ this trouble and this strife
Who but a silly woman

Scotland is Westminster’s abused wife. She should tell it/him where to get off then take away its/his keys to the shared house. Scotland needs to just say no to Westminster. Scotland too poor to stand on her own? It’s the oldest trick in the bullies handbook. Demoralize, demean, intimidate, undermining confidence. Lie. You’re too stupid. Too weak. We’ll hurt you if you leave.

It is said that clarifying what counts as Scottish in the UK economic stakes is complicated. Well, not that complicated but I’ll simplify it.

Let’s take Scotland’s international trade. Scotland’s exports to the rest of the world are counted as Scottish. Or sometimes they are. If goods or services leave Scotland for England, Wales or Northern Ireland and then get jumbled up with other goods or services and are subsequently exported then whatever Scotland’s input is disappears and the export is recorded as a UK export. I have not been able to discover what an English-produced good sent to Scotland and then exported as part of some other product is designated.

Of course that applies to goods apart from oil and gas which are always listed under the UK. The same applies to services provided by offshore industries – these also get added to UK income not Scottish. Anyone living around northeast Scotland will know that over the past fifty years servicing oil and gas here and across the world has been a major source of work and income.

So what will happen in the coming months with another independence referendum on the horizon? The UK’s media will rediscover its Scottish granny once more and we’ll have wall-to-wall Britain rammed down our throats. Once again Scots will be warned and threatened and sneered at for their ingratitude at wanting their country to regain its soverign nation status. You won’t have oil and gas…and neither will England and rumpUK. You’re too wee…as if size matters.

Scotland’s land area covers 77,933 km2 and the population is about 5,424,000. The GDP is currently about $237.628 billion that works out per capita about $43,740. Compare that with other small nations – that just happen to be the wealthiest countries in Europe.

Switzerland is a bit like Scotland – lots of mountains and lochs (they call them lakes) and, like Scotland is a top tourist destination. It doesn’t have oil and gas and it isn’t a major source of wind and wave power. Its population is around 8,600,000 not too different from Scotland’s and its land area a sqeeny 41,285 km2. So far so similar only its per capita is about double that of Scotland at US$ 85,374.

How about Norway another small European country, even more like Scotland with mountains and lakes and it does have an oil and gas industry. It covers 385,207 km2  much of that mountainous with a population around Scotland’s at just over 5,000,000. It is almost Scotland’s double – double in that its wealthy per capita is more than double at US$ 97,226 and its GDP again double, running northwards of $400 billion.

Luxembourg is a tiny country of .2,586.4 km2 and its population just over 600,000. It has no oil and gas and is not exactly graced with mountains and lakes. It is the third richest country in Europe with a per capita income of US $ 116,560.

If the gloom mongers of Better Together are to be believed Lichtenstein would be an independent basket case  – too wee, no oil and gas. It is tiny at only 160 km2  and its population is the size of Airdie’s at around 37,000. It does have mountains and virtually no unemployment. Per capita income is an impressive US $ 143,000.

The richest country in Europe is minisculy, tiny – only 2.2 km2. Monaco has a population of around 40,000 and its per capita runs to US $ 168,000. Oh and it doesn’t have high mountain or oil and gas. And not only is it the richest country in Europe it is the richest country in the world.

Anyone who would deny Scotland’s right to become independent on the basis of size needs to be told again and again and again that size doesn’t matter – it’s what you do with it.

One of the reasons these small independent countries are so successful is that they aren’t tied into an unequal, though precious, union with England run from Westminster.

Westminster has been interfering with Scotland’s economy even before the precious union was a gleam in the eye of some speculators both Scottish and English. In the days when building empires was all the rage and Scots thought they might dabble in just such a thing the Company of Scotland trading to Africa and the Indies (and incidentally the Americas) was established. It ran from 1695 – 1707 and the more observant of you will have registered the end date.

This enterprise proved to be an adventure too far – at least for the English state. It was the brainchild of that entrepreneur, William Paterson, the Scot behind the Bank of England.

At the time Scotland shared a monarch with England – the result of the union of the crowns in 1603 – but was otherwise an independent state. However, Scotland was left in no doubt that with the transfer of its king to London so the crown’s interests also moved south. in fact Scotland was regarded as an irritant (not to be dependent upon to back England in its wars of which there were many) and gadzooks a potential economic rival to the East India Company and Royal African Company. Bold Scotland’s attempt to create its own empire – a colony in northeast Canada around what is now Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island in 1621 foundered a decade later – a victim of England’s war with France.

Nova Scotia

Paterson’s scheme to colonise Darien, (Panama) in Central America to provide Scottish commerce with a secure harbour with access to both Atlantic and Pacific oceans found initial support within England as well as Scotland. However, as soon as the East India Company got wind of the plan it lobbied the King and the English parliament to scupper it. English investors took fright abandoning the whole sorry mess to Scots speculators. Those of you familiar with recent banking scandals will not be surprised that bankers and businessmen were equally duplicitous in the 17th century and to cut a long story short much of the money raised to fund the venture disappeared into various deep pockets.

See Darien and Navigation Acts: https://lenathehyena.wordpress.com/2017/11/03/theres-nothing-like-the-smell-of-xenophobia-in-the-morning

The Darien scheme had two enemies, aside from the climate, the Spanish who regarded the area as theirs and the English who regarded everything else as theirs. Scots ships were attacked and relations with England reached their lowest point.

Having an enemy on its border concerned the English court and parliament while within Scotland hardship increased not least through the loss of so much money wasted on Darien, lost commerce from confiscated cargoes on top of several seasons of poor harvests which hit the poorest hardest with severe food shortages. Scotland was on her knees.

England’s Navigation Acts crushed Scottish commerce by forcing all goods imported into England to be transported in English vessels. With the wind behind them England’s parliament at Westminster pressed for union with Scotland – to enable it the better to control the land to the north.

There was no democracy back in the 18th century and Scottish merchants who lost fortunes because of Darien and England’s aggressive maritime policy that denied Scotland access to its markets, were made an offer they felt they could not refuse. Come in with England and we’ll pay you compensation or else. This was union at the point of a sword – blackmail. England had the whip hand and used it to great effect. The ‘compensation’ was a carrot – and Scotland’s wealthy donkeys bit.

And so some of Scotland’s landed interests and city merchants accepted the 18th century equivalent of cashback. Cash paid as compensation for losses incurred through the actions of England and Spain. This cashback was called the Equivalent. Needless to say such an enticement came with strings attached. Scotland would have to agree to take on a share of England’s horribly large national debt and – wouldn’t you know – be taxed higher.

Once agreed the Equivalent cashback was distributed from the offices of the former Company of Scotland in Edinburgh and from the ashes a new company emerged imaginatively called the Equivalent Company. This group transformed itself into a banking organisation out of which the Royal Bank of Scotland materialised. And we know what that led to.

Scots were reassured that the proposed union with England would retain Scotland’s sovereignty. Of course that was a lie.

I have read but cannot confirm that a century earlier James VI, the guy who started all this union malarkey, or perhaps it was Sir Henry Savile in 1604, remarked that union between Scotland and England would end with the conquest of Scotland by England. He/he wasn’t wrong.

Ref – A Union for Empire: Political Thought and the British Union of 1707, John Robertson ed.,, CUP 2006

January 17, 2019

Scots Outlanders and their Integration into Native American Life

lachlan

Lachlan MacGillivray

It’s fairly well known that some Scots who turned up on the shores of America during the early years of European migration whether from choice, sanctuary or coercion integrated with Native Americans. Among this group were MacGillivrays from Dunmaglass in Inverness-shire who married into Creek Indians and proved duplicitous, becoming instrumental in the re-allocation of land in the years before and after the American Revolution.

The first male MacGillivrays to arrive first established themselves as traders and then as plantation owners and slave dealers. They were also involved in the indentured servant trade – some possibly being taken to the colonies as indentured servants and freed after years of servitude.

Highlanders such as MacGillivrays were among the first European migrants to cross the Atlantic and undoubtedly some were enticed by the likes of Essex man James Oglethorpe who was recruiting settler-soldiers to protect British crown interests in Georgia and resist Spanish and French ambitions beyond Florida and Alabama. What a nasty and destructive concept colonialism is.

One of the MacGillivrays to arrive from the Highlands was Lachlan MacGillivray (the name later contracted to McGillivray or M’Gillivray.) Fresh off the ship Prince of Wales in 1735 he, along with women and children, settled in Georgia. They called their settlement New Inverness (later its name changed to Darien after Darien in Panama the 17th century Scottish colony crushed by England’s government and merchant class.)

A rather fanciful tale of Lachlan MacGillivray’s life in America is taken from a source provided at the end of this blog –

“’A Scottish boy, of sixteen years of age, who had entered a ship in Dunmaglass and had arrived without accident at the Port of Charleston.’ It was here that he set foot upon American soil.
Pickett goes on to describe him for us:
He only had a shilling in his pocket, a suit of cloths upon his back, a red head, a stout frame, and honest heart, a fearless disposition, and cheerful spirits, which seldom became depressed.

Lachlan had come to this country around 1735 and was able to get along with everyone. He had lived in the forest with the Indians and he had enjoyed his life. He had been happily married and had raised five children here. They were all grown and married and had children of their own. Heartache and strife came to them and it does everyone.

His family in Scotland has always fought for the King of England. Lachlan had uncles who gave their lives in the battles of Culloden. When the Revolutionary War started he helped the British with supplies. The people, up until that time, had truly been free. However, the Indians resented the white people from the outside, coming in and taking their land. Lachlan McGillivray was called a Tory.

The state of Georgia had put Lachlan on the top of the list of Loyalists who were to be killed. He, at that time, deeded his land to his children and left what money he could before going back to Scotland. By this time Sehoy [his wife] had passed.”

sehoy, wife of lachlan and mother of william weatherford

Sehoy, wife of Lachlan and later mother of William Weatherford

Lachlan MacGillivray was to become one of the biggest plantation owners in the south, a slave importer and a member of the Georgia Assembly. Straight off the Prince of Wales Lachlan MacGillivray began trading along the Chattahoochee River (that runs through today’s Georgia and Alabama) dealing with Native Americans, mostly from the Muscogee, and French traders – and he established a string of trading posts. He married Sehoy Marchand, daughter of a French officer and Sehoy, a Muscogee Indian princess. Lachlan MacGillivray opposed American independence and at the outbreak of the American Revolution he abandoned his family and returned to Scotland at which point his property was seized by the federal government.

alexander mcg

Hipothel Mico said to have been murdered by Alexander McGillivray for calling him a usurper

One of Lachlan and Sehoy’s children was Alexander. Born in America into his mother’s Wind Tribe, his Muscogee name was Hoboi-Hili-Mico (Good Child King.) This tribe was organised as a matrilineality with kinship traced through the female line – regardless of the husband’s family. However, Alexander was educated at Scots Presbyterian schools and drawn into European culture rather than that of his Creek kin’s. In 1783 Alexander became chief of his mother’s Creek nation but he chose to live in the white migrant’s style in a permanent log house with a chimney surrounded by orchards which alienated parts of his Wind family. As chief, in 1784, he came to an agreement with Spain over 12,000 km of land occupied by the Muscogee while at the same time he was negotiating with Scottish migrant fur traders and slave dealers, Panton, Leslie & Company.

Panton, Leslie & Company had a long pedigree with varying personnel. Traders in the Bahamas, British East Florida and the southern American states – their interests began in the usual way, with animal pelts. Merchants from northeast Scotland – Panton was from Aberdour near Fraserburgh on the Moray coast. He was introduced to the trade while working as a clerk to John Gordon from Aberdeenshire who was a hugely successful trader in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. Another member of the company, Thomas Forbes, was John Gordon’s nephew. Thomas and his brother, John, were sons of James and Sarah Gordon Forbes from the County of Banff. John who was christened in 1767 near Gamrie died in Matanzas, Cuba in 1823 where he ran a sugar mill.

Panton’s Company was much involved in the triangular trade – buying, selling and transporting slaves and goods (rum, sugar, salt, indigo, firearms, gunpowder, lead bullets, hides, cotton, tobacco, rice and, principally, men, women and children) between the west coast of Africa, Europe and America (and West Indies.) Panton and Thomas Forbes set up their company in Savannah to cash in on the great influx of white migrants crossing the Atlantic and pouring into the southern states. Speculatively the company bought up huge tracts of land in Carolina and Georgia for European settlements.

Like Lachlan MacGillivray these men were loyalists to the British crown so when the American Revolution broke out they had their lands confiscated. Retreating to British Florida Panton’s company re-established itself despite Spain’s grip on much of Florida and prospered trading with the Spanish there. It was here they came into contact with John Leslie. The three along with a Charles Maclatchy bought up thousands of acres of land and 250 slaves to work mainly on plantations.

By the 1780s Panton, Leslie & Company’s headquarters transferred to the Bahamas while retaining their American activities. By 1795 the company dominated the southeast’s massive fur trade between Memphis and New Orleans. They linked up with Alexander McGillivray regarding his position within the Creek peoples as an advantage to them in the area.

Ruthless and ambitious Panton’s company not only traded legally though disreputably but was not averse to outright illegality as smugglers and content to practise every nasty business scam on the go such as price fixing and manipulating markets. The association with McGillivray paid off and Panton was appointed the official trader for the Creek Indians.

panton, leslie and company

Panton, Leslie and Company HQ

At Panton’s death in 1801, the company was taken over by the Forbes brothers, John and Thomas. In 1803 they were joined by John Leslie. Their main sphere of operation was between Georgia and the Mississippi with the company acquiring huge tracts of land from Creek and Seminole tribes – the Forbes Purchase comprised 1.4 million acres in West Florida between 1804 and 1812. John Forbes along with later business partners in West Florida, James and John Innerarity*, assumed Spanish citizenship and names. John Forbes became Juan Forbes.

*John Innerarity who was a brother-in-law to William Panton would become a Vice Consul of France at Pensacola, Florida.

trail of tears

The Trail of Tears

During the War of 1812 British troops looted the Innerarity trading post and freed slaves. More of an annoyance than anything else the company continued – buying up land. Private land purchases were challenged in the courts and in 1823 when it was established that only the federal government could acquire territory from Native Americans not private citizens land prices dropped from lack of competition meaning less money was paid in compensation to local tribes. In the 1830 Native American people were cleared to west of the Mississippi River – the Indian Removal Act – the Trail of Tears saw the Chickasaw, Choctaw, Muscogee-Creek, Seminole, original Cherokee Nations all forcibly moved off their lands by Andrew Jackson’s Act. All of this very similar to the Clearances in the Scottish Highlands and interestingly as more recent history has shown us – in the likes of Israel –  the very people who suffer under repression sometimes go on to impose almost identical acts of cruelty on others.

Alexander McGillivray was a British crown loyalist, like his father. He was instrumental in persuading President George Washington of the need for the government to take over  Native affairs instead of the practice of ad hoc treaties made between individual tribes and individual states. The resulting Treaty of New York (1790) gave the government’s War Department management of Indian strategies.

The first treaty made after this involved the removal of illegal white settlers from Indian territory and the handing back of refugee black slaves sheltered and living with Native Americans. Fingers were pointed at McGillivray for his duplicity over this issue but what the Creeks did not know at the time was McGillivray was employed on a substantial salary as a brigadier general with the government – a role that gave him with trading benefits and he was compensated for his father’s confiscated plantations. Cash rich, McGillivray setup three plantations of his own worked by slaves. And it may surprise no-one that the government did not turn any illegal settlers off Creek lands. Two years later wheeler and dealer McGillivray renounced the Treaty of New York so he could deal with the Spanish government then occupying Louisiana. Sometime known as the Emperor of the Creeks and Seminoles, Alexander was appointed Superintendent General of the Creek Nation by the King of Spain. As chief of his Muscogee people Alexander McGillivray was at the same time being paid by both the US and Spanish authorities to work on behalf of both countries.

Alexander McGillivray died on 17 February 1793 at Pensacola, Florida and was buried in William Panton’s garden until his remains were removed to Choctaw Bluff on the Alabama River. Several times married – to Creek and European women – he was regarded as a polygamist back in Scotland but his other activities were far worse.

weatherford surrenders to jackson

Weatherford surrenders to Jackson

Other members of the McGillivray clan were as involved with Native American affairs such as kinsmen William Weatherford and William McIntosh. Weatherford aka Lamochattee or Red Eagle was the Creek chief who led the Red Sticks’ offensive against the US in 1813-14, the Red Stick War, on the opposite side from his cousin, William McIntosh, Taskanugi Hatke or White Warrior who, like Alexander McGillivray supported European ways over Creek. British and Spanish traders supplied weapons to the Red Sticks to defy the expansion of the United States into their colonial interests. It resulted in defeat for the Creek confederacy with it having to give up 21 million acres of land in now Georgia and Alabama to the US government and was one in the eye for those Creeks who fought on the government’s side. The Cherokee Nation also lost vast areas of hunting grounds as well. McIntosh’s behaviour was regarded as treacherous by some among the Upper Creeks who killed him in 1825.

murder of mcintosh

The murder of McIntosh

The bulk of activities carried out by Scots traders such as the MacGillivrays in these early years involved trapping and shooting animals for their pelts but weapons, too and, of course, people – men, women and children kidnapped and trafficked were fair game as well as their exploitation of Native Americans who were paid a pittance for big profit goods or given cheap items in exchange to boost profits made on the European markets.

The extent of slaughter taking place in the early years of European immigration into America was staggering. Beavers for example – one beaver pelt was exchanged for one metal axe head in north America while that same beaver skin was worth dozens of axe head back in Europe. Around 1720 a beaver pelt cost around 5 shillings in Britain. By 1740 the price had doubled and that trend continued. The demand for felt hats made from beaver pelts was insatiable until beaver populations dwindled so much availability of skins was depleted. Profits were vast and wealth came fast for those European colonists who controlled trade.
fur hat industry

The Scots mentioned don’t scratch the surface of those who integrated with Native Americans. Many while born into native societies used their advantages e.g. could speak and write English to influence and in some cases sell-out their own people, trade away land, establish permanent farming and private ownership of animals as well as built and land property and, of course, deal and own people – slaves.

Unlike their brother, Alexander, Lachlan MacGillivray’s other children Sophia and Jean (Jeanne) did not receive anything from their father’s will. His estate was divided between his son Alexander and others from the MacGillivray clan.

It has been a matter of some conjecture whether or not Lachlan MacGillivray supported the Jacobite cause back in Scotland. We know he sided with the British crown and government against the American Revolution – as did many a Jacobite. As we’ve seen, for his actions he had lands confiscated in America by the newly formed US government and analogous to London’s German Hanoverian royalty’s land grab of estates belonging to Jacobite supporters in Scotland.

culloden macgillivray

We do know that MacGillivrays, as part of the Chattan Confederation, were Jacobites although their chief was an officer with the British Black Watch. His wife, Lady Anne Farquharson-MacKintosh, however, rallied the Chattans to the Jacobite cause and put Alexander MacGillivray (a different one) in command of the clan at Culloden. He was killed in battle along with many of his fellow-clansmen and boys. There is a simple memorial stone to the MacGillivrays on the Culloden battlefield and another at Dunlichity in Strathnairn, the mustering point of clan MacGillivray. A wall there that bore marks from clansmen sharpening their swords before battle was recently destroyed when a vehicle crashed into it. Such is the fragility of historical evidence.

Just as Jacobites fled Scotland for American earlier in the 18th century so Lachlan MacGillivray when he abandoned his family crossed the Atlantic the other way round, returning to Dunmaglass near Inverness with as much of his fortune as he could muster. He died in 1799 aged around 80 years. His half-Creek daughter Jean married a French officer who fought for Napoleon and his other daughter, Sophia, was married to a Benjamin Durant and is suspected to have been killed at the Fort Mims massacre. Peter A Brannon wrote in a newspaper article on August 2, 1931. “It was during the siege of Savannah in 1792 that Sophia, her husband and little boy, Lachlan Durant, went with her father to say good-bye. When the city surrendered to the Americans, she said good-bye to her father through a flood of tears. Lachlan sailed back to Scotland with the British soldiers.”

In an already confusing tale Sehoy Marchand, Lachlan’s wife, had a daughter, also Sehoy, with another man. This Sehoy married a Weatherford whose son William was Red Eagle who is mentioned above.

red eagle

Red Eagle

Confused? You should be.
Sources as promised –

 

https://www.bernethy-eby-scribner.com/getperson.php?personID=I616715240&tree=Eby

https://www.lib.lsu.edu/sites/default/files/sc/findaid/1271m.pdf