“The Jury find the
pannel Guilty of Maliciously assaulting and cutting tho’ not with intent to
murder and the Jury in consideration of the previous good character of the
pannel unanimously recommend him to the leniety of the court”[1]
Alexander Pattillo
must have breathed a sigh of relief. The thirty-eight year old pannel[2], from
Upper Sinsharnie, parish of Cairney, near Huntly, Aberdeenshire was sentenced
by the Judge, Lord Mackenzie, to six months in the Aberdeen’s Bridewell prison.
My Great Great Grandmother’s elder brother was fortunate not to receive a
longer sentence for injuring neighbouring farmer John Watt of Whitehillock. The
High Court of Justiciary records, preserved in the National Archives of
Scotland, give a dramatic account of the incident. The Court Minutes lists the
charges, the names, home communities and occupations of the fifteen members of
the jury, chosen by ballot, their decision and the sentence passed by the
Judge. The precognition, prepared for the court by the Sheriff and his
substitutes, includes the testimonies of all the witnesses and the medical
report by the attending Doctor. The witness statements even include the actual
words spoken by those present.
The Pattillo
family moved to Upper Sinsharnie from Corskie near Banff where Alexander was
born in 1790. His father, Andrew, died in 1821, so he lived with his Mother,
Jean, and his younger brother Andrew, earning his living as a “square-wright”
or furniture maker. Sisters Helen (my Great Great Grandmother) and Margaret had
recently married. According to family tradition, Helen left for her wedding to
John Cramond with four wagon-loads of “providings”, so the family were
relatively prosperous and respectable.
The parish of
Cairney was a close-knit community, and it was because of a community dispute
that Alexander spent six months in the Bridewell. The story is told by the
precognition[3].
John (Jock) Watt told the Sheriff that both he and Alexander Pattillo were
members of the Cairney Friendly Society and that there had been a dispute about
a payment which Watt had made, to which Alexander strongly objected. The
payment was made, since Watt was the “cautioner”[4]
of the Society, authorised for such actions. Strong words were passed; Jock
recalled saying that the bill would be cashed “tho’ he Pattillo were cursed for
it”[5]. This
dispute took place in August 1828.
The small town of
Keith, in the county of Banff is about six miles north-west of Cairney. It is a
historic market town, the centre for the surrounding agricultural area. Each
September a special market, the Summer Eve Fair was held in the town. It
attracted visitors not only from neighbouring Aberdeenshire and Morayshire, but
from all over Scotland. On Wednesday 17th September 1828, Jock Watt
and Alexander Pattillo were both at the market. Jock remembered meeting
Alexander and discussing the Friendly Society. He believed at that time, that the
issue was settled and that they parted on good terms.
They met again on
the way home at Alexander Paul’s house at Mains of Botarie, on the road between
Keith and Huntly, about a mile west of Cairney. This was a Public House,
serving mainly punch and whisky. On that evening, after the fair, its several
rooms were full of men from the local area and those from further afield, pausing
on their way home to Huntly and beyond. The company included farmers, road
makers, a shoemaker and a soldier from Huntly, a private in the 92nd
Regiment of Foot (later to become the Gordon Highlanders). Margaret Paul, the
Landlord’s wife was serving customers and keeping order. All the witnesses were
interviewed by the Sheriff or his substitute and their evidence describes what
subsequently transpired.
Jock Watt, on his
way home at about 8pm, decided to call into Paul’s, “for a dram”. Some time
later, after having some punch and whisky, he remembered that the landlord came
in to pass on a request for him to join John Smith of Clashbrae for a drink.
Smith was there, he had noticed, drinking with Alexander Pattillo and Jock
decided to decline the invitation. Alexander then came into his room and
started to discuss the Friendly Society. An argument started and following the
exchange of “high words”, the pair went outside to settle the issue. After some
pushing and shoving, during which Alexander seems to have come off worst, they
were separated and it was agreed they would go back inside. This they did, but
not before Alexander unexpectedly threw a punch at Jock’s face and made his
nose bleed.
Once inside the
argument continued and Jock decide to leave the room and sat down in the
kitchen, by the fire. Some time later Alexander followed him and, tapping him
on the shoulder, asked him to go outside again:
“Jock
Watt, come away out, I want to speak to you.”[6]
Despite advice
from the shoemaker, Alexander Pirie, Jock Watt did so. Pirie followed, asking
him not to go near Pattillo. Ignoring him, Jock Watt went up to Alexander
Pattillo, who struck him on the cheek “with something sharp which he held in
his hand”. Watt threw Pattillo to the floor and got on top of him but received
several more cuts in the process. Hearing Watt shout that he had been stabbed,
several men, including the soldier, John Dunbar, and the cooper, John Stevenson,
separated the men and took Watt inside. John Stevenson recalled:
“Watt was cut in the face,
in the breast and in one of the legs; and a good deal of blood was flowing from
the wounds on his face.”[7]
Pattillo followed
them in and the landlord said to him:
“You
bloody rascal, come in and see your handy work – the man will die”[8]
Paul recalled
Pattillo’s reply:
“That
was the way I wanted it.”[9]
The Landlord tried
to restrain him but was struck in the chest and Pattillo got clear and left the
house.
The Doctor was
called and he attended to Watt’s injuries, putting dressings on the more
serious wounds on his chest and leg. Doctor Bremner, in his medical report,
said that the former wound:
“…might have proved fatal
either by wounding the left lung or by causing an effusion of blood in the
thorax.”[10]
There was a
superficial cut across the left cheek on which he commented:
“…had
it been deep enough to divide the external jugular vein the consequences might
have proved fatal from loss of blood.”[11]
After his wounds
had been attended to, Watt was helped onto his horse and rode the half mile
home to Whitehillock farm. The Doctor saw him the following day and checked his
wounds, changing the dressings and prescribed Sulphate of Magnesia for the
headache caused by blood-loss and over-consumption of alcohol. Jock was unable
to work for eight days, but apart from some scarring, made a full recovery.
One of the road makers, Duncan McPherson
found the weapon:
“The same evening of the
affray and just after it ended the Witness found a knife lying on the ground
just beside where the affray had happened and there was blood on the knife.
That the knife had one blade and a white haft; and the blade was shut when the
witness had found it.”[12]
Two days later the
knife was reclaimed by its owner, another road maker, William Millar. He
remembered being asked by somebody at Paul’s (he could not recall who) for:
“…something to rid out a
tobacco pipe with.”[13]
This took place at
least an hour before he saw Watt re-enter Paul’s house, covered with blood.
So, had Alexander
borrowed the knife with the intent to injure or kill the man who appeared to be
getting the better of him in the on-going dispute? His comment to the Landlord
suggests that he did. When the Sheriff Substitute, Alexander Dauney Esq. LL.D
interrogated him at the Tollbooth[14]
about the knife, Pattillo declined to answer.
A few days after
the incident at Mains of Botarie, the Minister of Cairney, Mr Cowie, arranged a
meeting with Jock Watt, Alexander Pattillo and Dr. Bremner at which Pattillo
agreed to pay the Doctor’s fee for attending to Watt. He also agreed to pay
twenty shillings to the Poor of the Parish and:
“…expressed himself sorry
for having so injured the witness.”[15]
The court accepted
evidence from four people as to Alexander Pattillo’s previous good conduct and
character. They include one of the witnesses, Robert Stevenson, cooper, of Mill
of Castletown, Captain McPherson of Gibston, Dr. James Christie of Huntly and
George Gordon Esq. (possibly a member of the Marquis of Huntly’s family), also
of Huntly. They appear to have been individuals of some social standing and
influence, possibly some of Alexander’s customers or clients. Their evidence is
unfortunately not included in the records, but it must have been very positive
in influencing the court’s “leniety” or leniency.
Alexander survived
his six months in the Bridewell and returned to Cairney, where he continued in
his trade as a furniture maker and carpenter. He died in 1848, aged 60yrs,
leaving a second wife, two sons and a daughter by a first.[16] Whether
he learnt his lesson or not is a matter for conjecture. Hopefully, he learnt to
control his temper and limit his alcohol consumption. The sentence he received
was indeed lenient even by today’s standards. Dr Bremner’s medical report makes
it clear that two of the wounds inflicted could have proved fatal. That
Alexander Pattillo was very fortunate not to be charged with the murder of Jock
Watt, potentially leading to capital punishment, is without doubt.
Researched
and written by Ruairidh Greig
[1]
High Court of Justiciary Minute Book JC11/75 p.85
[2]
Scots legal term for accused or defendant
[3]
High Court of Justiciary AD14/29/179
[4]
Surety
[5]
Precognition, p.3
[6]
Precognition p.33
[7]
Precognition p.28
[8]
Precognition p.34
[9]
Ibid
[10]
Medical Report p.4
[11]
Ibid p.3
[12]
Precognisance p.41
[13]
Ibid, p.46
[14]
Aberdeen’s prison for those awaiting trial
[15]
Ibid p.13
[16]
Past and Present Company, Alan Pattillo, London 2000, Table F,
p.162