It appears from tradition, as well as some parish registers stillextant, that the lands of Dalcastle (or Dalchastel, as it is oftenspelled) were possessed by a family of the name of Colwan, about onehundred and fifty years ago, and for at least a century previous tothat period. That family was supposed to have been a branch of theancient family of Colquhoun, and it is certain that from it spring theCowans that spread towards the Border. I find that, in the year 1687,George Colwan succeeded his uncle of the same name, in the lands ofDalchastel and Balgrennan; and, this being all I can gather of thefamily from history, to tradition I must appeal for the remainder ofthe motley adventures of that house. But, of the matter furnished bythe latter of these powerful monitors, I have no reason to complain: Ithas been handed down to the world in unlimited abundance; and I amcertain that, in recording the hideous events which follow, I am onlyrelating to the greater part of the inhabitants of at least fourcounties of Scotland matters of which they were before perfectly wellinformed.
This George was a rich man, or supposed to be so, and was married, whenconsiderably advanced in life, to the sole heiress and reputed daughterof a Baillie Orde, of Glasgow. This proved a conjunction anything butagreeable to the parties contracting. It is well known that theReformation principles had long before that time taken a powerful holdof the hearts and affections of the people of Scotland, although thefeeling was by no means general, or in equal degrees; and it sohappened that this married couple felt completely at variance on thesubject. Granting it to have been so, one would have thought that thelaird, owing to his retiring situation, would have been the one thatinclined to the stern doctrines of the reformers; and that the youngand gay dame from the city would have adhered to the free principlescherished by the court party, and indulged in rather to extremity, inopposition to their severe and carping contemporaries.
The contrary, however, happened to be the case. The laird was what hiscountry neighbours called "a droll, careless chap", with a very limitedproportion of the fear of God in his heart, and very nearly as littleof the fear of man. The laird had not intentionally wronged or offendedeither of the parties, and perceived not the necessity of deprecatingtheir vengeance. He had hitherto believed that he was living in mostcordial terms with the greater part of the inhabitants of the earth,and with the powers above in particular: but woe be unto him if he wasnot soon convinced of the fallacy of such damning security! for hislady was the most severe and gloomy of all bigots to the principles ofthe Reformation. Hers were not the tenets of the great reformers, buttheirs mightily overstrained and deformed. Theirs was an unguent hardto be swallowed; but hers was that unguent embittered and overheateduntil nature could not longer bear it. She had imbibed her ideas fromthe doctrines of one flaming predestinarian divine alone; and thesewere so rigid that they became a stumbling block to many of hisbrethren, and a might