IF “The Mannie’s” statue is removed from its lofty column at Golspie, as Stewart Dickson suggests (Letters, June 15), then I hope the vacant plinth is not only dedicated to those who suffered during the Sutherland Clearance, but also names the main villains – all of them.
The 1st Duke of Sutherland usually heads the list of perpetrators, with Sellar, Young and Loch his zealous henchmen, but the role of another in this heinous episode is often forgotten.
The Duchess of Sutherland was the clan chief, and as such had a duty to care for her people in return for loyalty and service in time of war. Instead, she stood by as thousands of acres of what, since time immemorial, had been clan land were appropriated into her estate. She saw 15,000 of her people forcibly removed from their homes and is recorded as urging James Loch to encourage Sellar “to trounce those people who want to destroy our system”, adding that she hoped the aggressors would “be scourged”.
READ MORE: Celtic cross would be a fitting memorial to cleared Highlanders
She got her wish, and those clanspeople who didn’t leave their homeland for other shores were “generously” allowed to buy back 6,000 acres of the poorest land, two acres at a time.
Perhaps instead of demolishing statues we should be campaigning more vigorously to investigate land ownership? But that’s an argument for another day.
The duke was English and no doubt had little knowledge of Scottish clan traditions. His wife wasn’t raised in the Highlands, she was 17 before she set eyes on her inheritance, but she must have known what was expected of her. Instead she and her husband enjoyed a sumptuous lifestyle while others who for generations had given their allegiance to her family were made destitute.
The present monument was erected to the duke at her urging, but paid for by tenants, and ironically dedicated to a “judicious, kind and liberal landlord”. How fitting if it ends up commemorating those who suffered during to Clearances, but also documenting the perpetrators, with the duchess heading the list.
Pauline Taylor
Elgin
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel