1806.] 
with the moft indecent and fcurrilous al- 
lufions to my profeffion as an advocate, 
Since the author however in thofe in- 
ftances in which he has charged me with 
the fabrication of facts, with mifquota- 
tion and falfhood, has chofen to ftake his 
veracity in oppofition to mine; and fince 
he has fignified in his correfpondence with 
Mr. Nares upon the fubjeé&, that he 
declines at prefent to be made known,”’ 
I {hall proceed to dete and {tate his for- 
mer malignity in other journals, but with- 
out announcing his name to the world. 
The firft time that I ever heard of him 
was in May, 1800, when a RETRACTiON 
and APOLOGY concerning the ViACGRE- 
Gors appeared in the Monthly Maga- 
zine. The author, a copious writer in 
the Anti-jacobin Magazine and Review, 
had very artfully tranimitted to the 
Monthly Magazine for Augult, 1799, a 
libel againit the Macgregors and the 
Clan Alpin regiment, under the fiditious 
fignature of Gregor Macnab, At firft he 
denied ail knowledge of the libel with 
{uch bold and folemn_ protefations of 
his own innocence, and of his inviolable 
refpect for the clan and name of Mac. 
gregor, as could not well be difbelieved ; 
efpecially as the only motive that. could 
ever be difcovered for this unprovoked 
agereffion was, his fecret animofity. to- 
wards an oficer; who had refufed to dif- 
mifs a recruit at his requeft, When the 
manufcript however, was procured, and 
produced againit him in a court of juftice, 
his hand-writing appeared to be fo in- 
difputable, that as he was profecu‘ed at 
the fame time for another libel in the 
Edinburgh Magazine of the fame month, 
(Auguft, 1799) he chofe ta fubmit to the 
apology atteited and inferted by an Eng- 
lith clergyman, a friend of his own, in 
the Monthly Magazine for May, 1800, 
and referred to in this letter as an ample 
confirmation of the prefent {tatement, 
and as a proof that HE IS UTTERLY 
DISQUALIED FOR THE OFFICE OF a 
REVIEWER. 
The firft edition of my Hiftory of 
Scotland was publifhed in June or July 
thereafter, and in the Anti-jacobin Ma- 
gazine of the following year it was re- 
viewed in a ftrain of fuch grofs abufe as 
exceeded even the cuftomary ttyle for 
which that review is fo peculiarly dif- 
tinguifhed. The work contaied certain 
hiftorical and uncontrovertible faéts con- 
cerning the Macgregors, written fo early 
as the beginning of the year 1793, before 
I had heard of any recent attempt to re- 
vive the clan, or of any individual of note 
Mi. Laing’s Defence of his Hiftary of Scotland. 
519 
who had refumed the name. The publi- 
cation of thefe hiftorical facts, when com- 
pared to the recent humiliating recanta- 
tion of a libel, and the general tenor of 
the hiftory itfelf, were confidered it (eems 
as fufficient provocations; aad a long 
parade of authorities taken from the 
Encyclopedia Britannica, marked the 
writer as diltin@tly as if his name had 
been annexed to the article. 
In my fubdfequent D:fertation refpett- 
ing Mary Queen of Scots, I was content 
with intimating in a note, and in a man- 
ner intelligible only to the reviewer him- 
felf, that I underftood fufficiently both 
his name and charafter; being fatisfied 
that his animofity would foon betray him 
into fome new indiferetion. Accord- 
ingly, on peruting the article in queftion 
in the Briiifh Critic, I immediately re- 
cognized, though with fome furprife, my 
old and almoft-forgotten acquaintance 
Gregor Macnab. On his quarrel, with 
the Anti Jfacobin, his pen has been en- 
tirely devoted to the Britifh Critic. The 
coarfenc{s of his inveétives was fomewhat 
corrected; but his malevolence was the 
fame as formerly. His allufions to my 
hiftory were alfo the fame; and an allu- 
fion in particular to Lord Bauff’s, bribe 
in the Scottifa parliament, repeated ia 
the Britifh Critic (p.491), alo ver- 
batim from the Anti-Jacobin (X..145)s5 
renders the identi:ry of the author indif- 
putabie. Bat the following pafiage re. 
{petting a manuicr pt which I had depo~ 
fited in the Advocate’s Library, affords a 
convincing detection of the author, whofe 
name the editors of the Britith Critic 
_ © would be proud to avow,’’ but whic 
he himfelf is.fo unwilling to reveal. 
‘© We have indeed been zxformed by a 
very competent judge, by whom at our 
requeft it (the manufcripi) was examined 
with fome care, that it is a thing of very 
litde value, appearing to be a collection 
of the reports of the day, with as little 
difcrimination as is ufuaily to be found 
in a New{paper.”’—Briti/h Critic, p. 396s 
This manufcript, the original of Craw- 
ford’s f{ourious Memoirs, was publifhed 
at Whitaker’s defire, within a few weeks 
after my hiftorv, under the title of the 
iforie and Life of King James the 
Sext: and a very different account of its 
merits will be found in the oldeit and moft 
re(pectsble of our literary journals, the 
Mosthly Review for December laft.’ Bat 
the manu!cript has never been communi- 
cated to any, except to two gentlemen, 
either before or fince it was publithed ; 
and in this fact there can be no miftake, 
Unalefg 
