Anniversary Address. 29 



of the castle, and (an office usually conjoined with it), 

 sheriff of Teviotdale, to the great displeasure of the knight 

 of Liddisdale, who considered his exploits had given him an 

 equal claim.* Their rival pretensions f were appeased for the 

 time hy the interposition of mutual friends, but the recon- 

 ciliation on the part of Douglas was outward only. Watching 

 his opportunity he repaired to Hawick on the occasion of 

 Ramsay holding his first court, about three months after- 

 wards, and approaching hirn under the guise of friendship he 

 suddenly assaulted him in St. Mary's Church on the 20th 

 June, 1342, slew several of his slender following, and drag- 

 ging him, Avounded, from the judgment-seat, hurried him 

 away to Hermitage. There thrusting him into the dungeon 

 under the southern tower, without food, he left him to die 

 miserably of hunger. J 



The king was justly incensed at such flagrant contempt of 

 his authority, but found himself impotent to deal with so 

 powerful an offender. For three years the knight remained 

 in disgrace, safely secluded within the strong walls of Hermi- 

 tage, whence he made occasional raids on the English Border.§ 

 During this interval king Edward again made overtures to 

 withdraw him from his allegiance, not altogether it was 

 believed, without success. About the same time Bullock, 

 his friend and companion in arms, who had been advanced to 

 the post of Grand Chamberlain of Scotland, fell under similar 

 suspicion and was seized by the king's command and com- 

 mitted to the charge of Sir David Berkley, by whom he was 

 immured in the castle of Lochendorp, in Morayshire, and 

 allowed to perish by starvation, in the same cruel manner as 

 Sir Alexander Ramsay. || 



* At the same time William (afterwards Earl of) Douglas received a grant of 

 the Manor of Liddel, generally held separately from the valley of Liddel and 

 Hermitage. Chalmers Caled. II., 119. 



t Several writers state that tbe office of Sheriff was already held by Douglas, 

 hut this appears to be an error. There is no evidence of any such grant by com- 

 petent authority, although it is probable enough that the knight had assumed the 

 exercise of the sheriff's powers on his conquest of Liddisdale. 



J Hailes Ann. II., 229. 



§ Eedpath, 335. 



|| Tytler, II., 66. Hailes Ann., II., 230. 



