324 B I 0 G R AP H I C AL S KE T C HE S.
of ninety-three. In his manner and habits he was scarcely less peculiar than
the Laird, though somewhat more particular as to his dress. He wore a plain
coat, without any collar ; a stock in place of a neckcloth ; knee breeches ; rough
stockings ; and shoes ornamented with niassy buckles. At an early period of
life he persisted in wearing (until so annoyed by the boys as he walked in the
Meadows, that he judged it prudent to comply with the fashion of the times, ’)
a hat of a conical shape, with a narrow brim, in form not unlike a helmet. At
a later period he adopted the broad-rimmed description represented in the
Print. When he had occasion to call any of his domestics, he rang no bell,
but invariably made use of a whistle, which he carried in his pocket for the
purpose. His indifference to money matters amounted even to carelessness.
He kept no books with bankers ; a drawer, and that by no means well secured,
in his own house, being the common depository of his cash,
Though an ardent admirer
of the British Constitution, yet not insensible to its abuses or defects, he was
opposed to the foreign policy of Government at the era of the French Revolution.
His opinions on this subject he embodied in an anonymous pamphlet, entitled
“ An Inquiry into the Justice and Necessity of the Present War with France,”
8vo, Edin. 1795, of which a second and improved edition was published the
following year. In this essay he contended for the right which every nation
had to remodel its own institutions; referring, by way of precedent, to the
various revolutions effected in Britain, without producing any attempt at interference
on the part of other states. “If we consult the principles of natural law
and equity,” says the writer, “ France must certainly have an equal right with
any other European state to change and to frame her constitution to her own
mind. She is as free and independent in this respect as Great Britain, or any
other kingdom on the globe ; and there does not appear to be auy reason why
she should be excluded from exercising this right, or why we should pretend to
dictate to her with regard to the government she is to live under. When
Louis XIV., on the death of James VI., thought proper to proclaim his son
King of Great Britain, how did the Parliament here take it? Did they not
address the King upon the throne, and represent it in their address as the highest
strain of violence, and the greatest insult that could be offered to the British
nation, to presume to declare any person to be their King, or as having a
title to be so P What, therefore, should entitle us to take up arms in order to
force them to submit to monarchical government I” Such is the style and spirit
of the Inquiry.
Pursuant to a deed of entail,
Mr. James Gibson, W.S. (afterwards Sir James Gibson-Craig, Bart. of Riccarton
and Ingliston) succeeded to the estate, and assumed the name and arms of
Craig. The $Ouse in Princes Street, No. 91, now occupied as a hotel, was left
to Colonel Gibson.
In politics, Mr. Craig was decidedly liberal.
Mr. Craig died on the 13th of March 1823.
Cocked hats were then the rage.