The Improvements

Between the Union in 1707 and 1793 agriculture, law, transportation, finance, education and the arts were all revolutionised in Scotland.

To put this into context European politics, philosophy and science dramatically changed during the “long 18th century” (1685-1815) as part of the Enlightenment. Enlightenment thinkers in Britain including Scotland, in France and throughout Europe questioned the traditional authority paradigm and put forward the philosophy that society could be improved through rational change. The American and French Revolutions were directly inspired by the Enlightenment.

The American War of Independence (1775 – 1783) was at first seen as a threat by Scots, a threat to trade and therefore income. In fact most Scots emigrants ended up as loyalists when the fighting began. It was closely followed in the newspapers that had begun to circulate around this time. However when the war was won there was clear example of what could be achieved by the people for the people (to paraphrase Lincoln some one hundred years before the Gettysburg address).

This was also the time of the ideas that sparked and eventually led to the French revolution, the storming of the Bastille was 14th July 1789 which was the climax of an economic crisis that started in 1776. These ideas included acrimony by peasants, labourers and the bourgeoisie toward the traditional almost feudal privileges possessed by the aristocracy (see Thirlage) and above all the hope and desire for social, political and economic equality.

The Revolution served as an example for Scotland’s developing middle and working classes. It showed what could be achieved and that the people could participate in government. It also showed that constitutions could be drawn up by men not kings.

This was the time of the ideas that sparked and eventually led to the French revolution, the storming of the Bastille was 14th July 1789 which was the climax of an economic crisis that started in 1776. These ideas included acrimony by peasants, labourers and the bourgeoisie toward the traditional seigneurial privileges possessed by the nobility and above all the hope and desire for social, political and economic equality.

In Scotland the main push towards improvement, then, was not entirely motivated by landowners simply looking for greater profits and power, by systematic abuse of the their tenants. The theory was part of the philosophy of the Enlightenment put forward by leading lights such as Adam Smith and David Hume. It was meant to serve as a positive force to empower those in authority to use creative and technological improvements improve Scottish society as a whole and do away with the instability and famine from before.

Agriculture did not escape the positivist trend of placing all knowledge into systematic form. Writing in 1776 in the preface to The Gentleman Farmer, Lord Kames stated ⁹:

“I pretend only to have reduced the theory of agriculture into a sort of system, more concise at least, and more consistent, than has been done by other writers.”

We know that the Gordon estate received a copy of this book as early as 1777 (¹⁰). The debt to the bookseller was not paid until 1780!

In the back of landowners minds there was also the thought that a disgruntled mass of half starving tenants could easily turn into a revolutionary rabble. Better to get them of your land and out of the way than let such ideas fester.

The improvements therefore did not help in a wider distribution of wealth. The number of landowners in Scotland had always been relatively small and it fell still further during the period of agrarian transformation. In England and Wales 12% of families were owner-occupiers in 1798. The Scottish figure for 1770 was 2.3%, or 8000 landowners (¹¹). The decline from the position around 1688 may be as much as 20%, although figures for the earlier period are less precise and this is impossible to quantify with any exactitude.

‘The surest test of improvement is the rent that can be afforded’, wrote one tenant reformer (¹²). There is an interesting note about the possibilities of improvements and the Duke of Gordon’s approach to this with Gillan offering:

And even with respect to the proprietor’s interest, which must always be a leading consideration, it is presumed that the small tenants can afford to pay as high a rent as greater ones, from their superior industry and attention; and if one should now and then fall in arrears, the risk is not so great as when the same thing happens to a greater tenant.

Taking 1660 as the base year and adjusting for inflation, by 1740 the national average rent had doubled, by 1770 it had tripled, by 1793 it had increased more than 7 times and by 1811 it had increased 15 times (¹³). That is 15 times more rent for the landowners – 2.3% of the population.

The results were far reaching and notwithstanding the social impact, agricultural improvement may in fact have been the pivotal point in the transformation of Scotland from a poor, famine ridden country to an industrial world-leader in the 19th and 20th centuries. Neither urbanisation nor industrialisation could have developed as it did in 19th century without the paradigm shift in the agrarian economy which allowed food and raw materials to be supplied to the growing manufacturing centres.

In 1700, it is estimated that in Scotland just 5% of the population lived in urban areas (burghs) of a population of 10,000 or more. However 1800 Scotland had become “one of the five most urbanised societies in Western Europe” (¹⁴). For example from 1700 to 1750 the percentage increase in urban population was 124% in Scotland the increase was 124 percent and from 1750 to 1800 it rose further to 132%.

The social cost of the changes however was immense. Gone were the cottars, sub-tenants, and local craftsmen: labourers had little or no place in the new social order. Labour mobility was required therefore at a massive scale – both geographic and occupational. Form farm worker to cotton spinner from one side of the country to another.

There was another option – leave the country altogether and seek out opportunities in the Americas – thus the improvements were a major influence in the Scottish Diaspora.

While details for Speymouth and Bellie are not forthcoming the emphasis of improvement and changes in land use on the Gordon estates of Badenoch and Strathspey focused on the provision of industry and employment for the indigenous population and to attract settlers from other estates.

The Duke was not an enthusiast for improvement, and his only step in this direction was to modernise and rebuild his own Castle Gordon. The Duchess of Gordon was far more of an improver and included friends such as Lord Kames, author of The Gentleman Farmer, which was a practical guide to improvement, aimed to convert landowners to the principles of improvement. In 1769 Kames and the Duchess discussed means of assisting the poor in and around Fochabers through the introduction of manufacturing. By the mid 1770’s many tenants on the Gordon estates had fallen into serious rent arrears following the famine of the early 1770s – this is witnessed by the number that swelled the ranks of the Poor List in the parish records.

The Duchess, evidently an independent woman, had developed her own farm just 40 miles away in Banffshire, CuttleBrae. Here the results were extraordinarily good as a results of the new methods. The quality of the crops had improved and the yield of flax, one of the major crops, was very high at 68 stone / acre. This of course could have been because of the land but clearly the message was that the new methods were improving the land and the yields.

The Duke in his plans to renew the castle needed to move the village of Fochabers lock stock and barrel and used the excuse of the planned villages that were springing up across the North East of Scotland.

In 1739 Joseph Cuming of Auchry enclosed and consolidated land around Monquhitter in Banff, just 40 miles away. His tenants did not have a central place to sell their goods and by building and financing manufacturing in the village was able to turn a barren moorland that yielded just 11 pounds in rent into a profitable village that very quickly yielded 150 pounds in rent.

Something like this was probably also in the mind of the Duke of Gordon when he planned the new Fochabers. By 1778 pretty much when the village was getting going it was reported that there were 50 looms making both wool and linen goods. Thread was also made for stockings and was often sent to Nottingham for the lace industry there. There were also a bleachfield, used to beach the cloth using the sun. Incidentally the bleachfield became redundant after the discovery of Chlorine in the late 18th century but remained an important part of Scottish villages for some time afterwards.

So the first “improvement” was to the Duke’s castle as was the case with the rest of the land owning aristocracy was up to at the time (¹⁵).

The remodelling of existing houses or the building up of new ones to fit modern taste, coupled with the money spent to finance a designed landscape and a luxurious lifestyle, increased the demand for revenues. The costs of construction and living pushed landowners to make use of all the resources available to them. These ranged from estate incomes to political sinecures, colonial income and credit.

The architect John Adam was commissioned with the French architect Abraham Roumieu to redesign Gordon castle in 1764, his father had died in 1752, but this did not come to fruition. Finally the Duke commissioned a lesser-known Edinburgh architect, John Baxter, who rebuilt it in 1769. This project required finance. The agricultural improvements were seen to be a major part of this as was the subsequent construction of them planned village of (New) Fochabers.

The cost was so great that Rabbie Burns wrote the following of the estate when staying there in 1787:

“Wildly here without control,

Nature reigns and rules the whole.”

1770

1770-71 (¹⁶)

Alterations and additions.

Note of payments to and account of Mr John Baxter, architect. They amount to 1778: £ 9,783 16 2 1/2.

1772

1772 (¹⁷)

Alterations and additions.

Building accounts noted by John Logie. They show sums paid to masons, quarriers, joiners, plasterer, glaziers and labourers as well as freight charges.

1770-82 (¹⁸)

Alterations and additions.

Accounts for building work, kept by John Logie Factor. The annual amounts spent are as follows.

1774: £ 1,482 3 4

1775: £ 1,409 3 10

1776: £ 1,522 4 9

1777: £ 1,205 3 7

1778: £ 797 12 7

1774

1774-78 (¹⁹)

Alterations and additions.

State of Account of His Grace the Duke of Gordon with John Baxter, architect. It includes mason work measured by Alexander Ponton and John Logie, superintendence of the different works, Drawings, and interest and it amounts to £ 10, 633 15 4 1/2 (1778-1782).

1783

1783 (²⁰)

Introduction to account for building.

‘Thereafter in 1780 some additional work was performed which was measured by Robert Thomson, foreman to Mr Baxter, and John Logie the Duke’s Clerk of accompts conform to this measurement dated the 20th April 1781’.

1790

1790 (²¹)

Building of new lodges at the entry to Gordon Castle.

Accounts for and measurement of the work. Mason William Logie, Plumber John Blackie

1804

1804 (²²)

Building the gardener’s house at Gordon Castle and adding 3 porches.

Discharged accounts.
Mason: William Logie Wrights: Alexander Logie and Alexander Chrystie
Slater: James Marquis Glazier: Robert Logie

1814 (²³)

Alterations and additions.

Report by John Logie Factor, and Robert Thomson Foreman, on John Baxter’s additional work at the Castle.

He and his family were duly rewarded for his work (²⁴):

Discharge, branch 15th. Building accounts

William Logie, mason – masons and carpenters, from Oct. 1783 to Jan. 1785

Philip Robertson and John Hall’s labourers for work plasterwork and quarry.

David Wilkison, wright, his weekly paylists, 25 March to 29 Aug. 1782 John McInnes, mason, for building a house in Glenfiddich, 1783-5

Promiscuous payments includes Donald McBain, floater, house at Burnside for Mr Logie, freight of marble chimneys from London.

(Note the opulence of the marble chimneys.)

William Logie in this ultimate entry is John Logie’s brother (see his page for more details) – he made a fortune out of the castle construction.

There are no revolts or riots by the people of Speymouth – in fact internal they seem to have taken it relatively well. There was some emigration noted. Wages seem to have been rising as a results of the improvements as well. Gillan makes a note in the OSA (1791):

The wages of men fervants for the half year, have rifen above one third within thefe 7 years; and feem rather too high for this part ot the country. It is alfo a pretty general complaint, that they do lefs work than when they had much lefs wages. To remedy this inconvenience, the beft method feems to be, to employ married fervants mores than has been done in this part of the country for fome time paft, and to accommodate them, and day-labourers and tradefmen, with houfe and other conveniences on the farms. This will encourage them to fettle in the country. The greater farmers are beginning to fee the conve- nience of having fome married fervants. As they cannot fo eafily re- move their families, they are lefs given to change, and, by confequence, more ftudious to pleafe. Their children, too, by encreafing the number, will leften the wages of fervants.

This rise in salaries therefore does seem to mean that those that remained were at least better off in Speymouth.

There were some complaints that have made it through the centuries to be noted:

1776 July 27

Letter from Robert Willox, Gaulrige, to Alexander, duke of Gordon. (²⁵) Robert Willox was the Gamekeeper to the Duke

Protests that he is turned out of Kirktown and asks for a low country tack to enable him to make bread for his young family; resents fact that the minister has got Kirktown, considering how his nearest friends behaved with the wittness in this country at making the marches of Feavate … Mr Ross is an intire stranger to this, otherways he never wood given him on Rige of Kirktown, on equal terms … I have got a great many enemies to myself for keeping your Grace property, the minister coud have no anger at me, but one your Grace account … Considering all this I think it was hard to turn me out on his account … but all I shall say is may God reward me according to my Fidelity to your Grace in every circomstance of life.

1780 February 5

Letter form Tennants of Stynie

The tenants of Stynie in Speymouth remonstrating agt an intended enclosure

To his Grace the Duke of Gordon,

We your Grace’s Tennants under subscribing Tacksmen of Upper Stynie, Nether Stynie and Newtown in the parish of Speymouth having observed lately marks for a Strip of planting upon the little Muir that borders on the bank of the River Spey, and joins immediately with our own Tacks, and that said Strip is designed to extend along said bank from the Corn-land of Stynie to the Corn-land of Newtown – Beg leave with all possible respect and deference to represent to your Grace – that the above described inclosure will be highly prejudicial to our respective possessions by so totally confining us, that we cannot leave out cattle loose about our doors without exposing the dykes every moment to be rubbed down by them and by rendering it wholly impossible for us to keep our flock of sheep which in this place is a great part of our dependance. And therefore may it please your Grace to cause inquire into the grounds and truth of the above representation and to order them as your Grace shall see cause.

Stynie

5th Feburary 1780

(signed)

John Thomson, James Innes, John Elles, William Lamb.

Apart from the improvements and the spending on the Castle the Duke of Gordon also decided to build a newtown further away from the Castle which provided for some people to be relocated (see the page on Fochabers).

1789 February 11

Letter from Dr Robert Couper to James Hoy.

Question of paying rent for house in Fochabers; Mrs Couper Grace Stott does not like it; she says it makes her feel like a person looking up out of a grave’; she would prefer James Logie’s house; writer offers to stay rather than disoblige the duke.

With covering letter from James Hoy to Alexander, duke of Gordon, same date, remarking sourly doctors and doctrines are all alike’; asks advice.

We know from the Statistical Analysis that the parish composed:

• about 1/3 of the parish is cultivated
• 530 acres of pasture
• 300 acres of woodland
• 50 acres of moss
• 110 acres of beach and pebbles
• 1/2 the parish is moorland

The farms were still small despite some improvements:

• 6 farms of 60 – 80 acres
• 3 or 4 farms of 40 – 50 acres
• 15 farms of 20 – 35 acres
• approximately 50 farms of 2 – 10 acres.

The average rent paid was 10 shillings / acre. Clearly before any improvements therefore the farms would have been very small indeed – barely supporting a family.

There is still a clear two tier situation of farms above 35 acres and this below – only 13% of the number of farms were above this watershed although in terms of acreage it closer to 50% belonged to larger farms. By the end of the century there were only about 11 farms left in Dipple.

The better farmers (the larger farms) used the following rotation:

• 1 crop of grass
• 2 crops of oats
• 1 crop of barley or were using dung as a fertiliser
• (alternatively) turnips, peas and potatoes
• 1 crop of here
• 1 crop of oats with grass seed

The use of clover was practised as well as a method of fixing nitrogen. In the low grounds, near the river, there was some wheat grown generally after a crop of turnips or potatoes.

The other, smaller, farmers use a more traditional rotation with considerably less sophistication and missed out the key use of nitrogen fixing crops:

• leave the land fallow for 3 years
• 2 -3 crops of oats
• bere with dung (occasionally sowed with peas)
• 1 crop of oats and rye
• 2 crops of oats

Fallow ground is between 1/6th and 1/5th of the total land.

We find therefore a clear division between what are apparently “improved” farms and those that are still much the same as they were fifty years beforehand. This apparent dichotomy appears in other parts of Scotland. One of the first and most enthusiastic improvers was Archibald Grant had started improving the estate of Monymusk in Aberdeenshire (about 45 miles from the Gordon’s Ducal home). Here the improvements started early in 1713. In 1774 the same two tier divisions could be observed – apparently improved farms bordering smaller and underdeveloped holdings. As Soper puts it (²⁶):

But what must be emphasised in that the process of development was not just a little matter of capital and technical know-how. Sir Archibald Grant had known what was wanted for half a centurY and he was prepared to go a considerable distance in creating the conditions under which these developments could take place

The tenants too were the dissatisfied with their subsistence standard living. But the changes necessary to increase the production of the individual tenant also required him to change a way of life to which he had become accustomed , and this he was not readily prepared to do.

What were then the improvements that were being put forward in agricultural terms and clearly being suggested by the Duke of Gordon amongst others:

• Changing rents paid in kind to money
• The division of common land (the moors)
• The abolition of Runrig and better rotation of crops
• Enclosing areas to protect them from being trampled by livestock
• The creation of commercially viable farms particularly through size and the use of new technology
• The introduction of long term (written) leases to incentivise tennants

The advantage was then in the most part to the land holder – money to be able to invest instead of goods to be sold externally to the local community. Giving and converting more land to arable or at least agricultural use. The goal of the economics of the land was to yield more and attain better stability. The latter point was probably the most important to the tenants and sub-tennants of the time!

In Achibald Grant’s Monymusk estate the critical success factors too achieve the changes required were identified as:

• the landowner – he had to to have the will, finance and staying power to keep the initiaive going. In the case of Monymusk this was a given but in the case of Speymouth this is not so obvious as it was reported that the Duke was not a great enthusiast.
• Planning and reporting – there needed to be clear objectives and detailed planning especially for crop rotation.
• Livestock – the introduction of livestock was a key element. There is evidence that was black cattle, sheep and horses as well as oxen in the parish early on. The famous Angus cattle was also reared close to Fochabers.
• Tools – In Monymusk there were wagons, carts, wheel ploughs common ploughs and harrows all mentioned. The wheeled plough or “Small” Plough named after it Scot’s inventor James Small, from Berwickshire were truly innovative. The Old Scot’s Plough was wooden – the new ploughs were iron and were mathemeatically engineered. The use of wagons or wheeled carts were also innovative. With very few roads the use of sledges were used – in 1716 in Monymusk there were no wheeled carts.
• Plantation – the use of trees as a long term crop (see later)
• Lease time – in Monymusk leases were extended to 19 years. In Speymouth the leases appear to of between 17 to 19 years from 1755 onwards.
• Tenancy agreements – the agreements often stipulated specific elements of the improvements such as rotation of crops or enclosing areas
• Rents – by increasing rents with time the incentive was to be able to increase productivity
• Role of the Factor – the factor in Monymusk used a variety of methods and incentives to entice the tenants and farmers into improving their land:
  • subscription to “The Scot’s Farmer” magazine the idea being to lead by example. However the farmers did not adopt this idea – they were reticent to pay for it in the beginning suggesting that the landowner pay for it.
  • Club meetings to discuss the improvements eg. the advantages of planting turnips – again under the brand heading of leading by example
  • bringing to task farmers that were not improving their farms and trying to coerce or persuade them to change
  • using the threat of eviction for not fulfilling the requirements of the tenancy agreements
  • being lenient in times of poor harvests such as 1772 and possibly allowing arrears

The problems encountered were:

• the farmers conditions were all different and there was not one plan fits all
• targets had to be understandable and realistic
• if the landlord removed tenants there were not necessarily better prepared tenants to take their place. It is possible to see that by consolidating farms that were contiguous this could be a way forward and it would naturally lead to less farms
• there were better options for tenants – perhaps on a different estate or more to the point emigration to North America
• in general the smaller farmers were suspicious of the new methods and it represented a large risk for them

The way in which these changes were made is not simple. It required some good change management skills. Partitioners were people who were responsible for implementing these day-to-day changes that made improvement possible and profitable. They were the project managers and change managers. They were in day to day contact with the farmers themselves and were hands on. They were often selected from the local tenants being already successful and who had shown knowledge and learning of agriculture(²⁷). As factors, they were the implementors and were often quite autonomous – especially if the landlord was absent for any length of time.

This is interesting given the roles of John Logie in the Estate Accounts. John Logie (who has his own page) worked for the Duke of Gordon as an employee (as opposed to servant) from at least 1772 until his retirement in about 1800. He started as the Clerk of Accounts and ended up as Factor – he clearly was pivotal in the control of the Castle Improvements. By Michalemas in 1788 we know that John Logie of Burnside was already on the Poll of Freeholders.

We also know (²⁸) that John Logie played an important part of the agrarian community, after the castle project was mostly finished, as he was Factor on lands of Duffus, Dipple, Essle and barony of Garmouth, and lands of Mathiemill, 1782-95, and for Dipple, Essle and barony of Garmouth to 1798. From about 1783 he also had his own house built by the Duke – see NAS GD44/51/386/2

His father William Logie was a key tenant to the Duke and a kirk Elder in Dipple. The family would have been in an excellent position to hold the respect of the community. There are no details of the methods that they used but it would have been a mixture of the methods seen in Monymusk as well as the incentives of better accommodation in Fochabers and the examples of Cuttlebrae.

Emigration and the army were other alternatives which were in fact used by John Logies younger brothers. His cousins ended up moving further South towards Dundee following the flax industry.

1. Davidson, Neil. “The Scottish path to capitalist agriculture 1: From the crisis of feudalism to the origins of agrarian transformation (1688–1746).” Journal of Agrarian Change 4.3 (2004): 227-268. ↩
2. SMOUT, T. C. (1985). A history of the Scottish people, 1560-1830. London, Fontana. ↩
3. Smout, T. Christopher, and Alexander Fenton. “Scottish agriculture before the Improvers—an exploration.” The Agricultural History Review (1965): 73-93. ↩
4. Richard B. Sher, “Scotland Transformed: The Eighteenth Century,” in Scotland: A History, ed. Jenny Wormald (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005) ↩
5. The Nature and Development of Infield-Outfield in Scotland, Robert A. Dodgshon, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, No. 59. (Jul., 1973), pp. 1-23 ↩
6. Mackinnon, James. The Social and Industrial History of Scotland: From the Union to the Present Time. Longmans, Green, 1921. ↩
7. Graham, Henry Grey. The social life of Scotland in the eighteenth century. A. and C. Black, 1906. ↩
8. Smout, T C & Fenton, A 1965 ‘Scottish agriculture before the Improvers – an exploration’, Agr HistRev,13(1965) ↩
9. H.Home, Lord Kames, The Gentleman Farmer, (Edinburgh, 1776), xii. ↩
10. GD44/43/185 Encloses account for books sent to the duke of Gordon, 1776-7. Titles include Gibbon, various maps of America, Lord Kaimes’ Gentleman Farmer,’ 9 volumes of Metastasio’s works, Lord Chesterfield’s ‘Characters,’ etc. ↩
11. Soltow, Lee, 1990. ‘Inequality and Wealth in Land in Scotland in the Eighteenth Century’. Scottish Economic and Social History, 10: 38–60. ↩
12. Wight, Andrew, 1778–84. Present State of Husbandry in Scotland Extracted from Reports Made to Commissioners of the Annexed Estates and Published with their Authority, 4 Volumes. Edinburgh. ↩
13. Timperley, Linda, 1980. ‘The Pattern of Landholding in Eighteenth-Century Scotland’. In The Making of the Scottish Countryside, eds M.L. Parry and T.R. Slater, 137–54. London and Montreal: Croom Helm and McGill Queen’s University Press. ↩
14. R. G. deVries, ‘Birth and Death: Social Construction at the Poles of Existence’,Social Forces 59 (1981), 1074–93. ↩
15. Clarisse Godard Desmarest, « Financing the Cost of an Eighteenth-Century Scottish Estate », Études écossaises, 15 | 2012, 145-163. ↩
16. GD 44/Sec 51/Bundle 471 ↩
17. GD 44/Sec 52/152 ↩
18. GD 44/Sec 49/Bundle 16 ↩
19. GD 44/Sec 51/477 ↩
20. GD 44/Sec 49/Bundle 16 ↩
21. GD 44/Sec 51/Bundle 388 ↩
22. GD 44/Sec 51/Bundle 389 ↩
23. GD 44/Sec 52/201 ↩
24. NAS GD44/51/386/2 ↩
25. Repository,National Records of Scotland,Reference, GD44/39/27, Title,Papers relating to the duke’s forests ↩
26. Monymusk, 1770-1850 – a study of the economic development of a Scottish Estate by Soper, T. P., Ph.D., UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN (UNITED KINGDOM), 1955 ↩
27. Haddix, Joshua D. C. Agrarian Reform and Agricultural Improvement in Lowland Scotland, 1750-1850: A Thesis. , 2013. Internet resource. ↩
28. NAS GD44/51/160 ↩
29. G. S. MAXTON, M.A. Edinburgh, 1913. A special Inquiry into Agricultural Developments during the Mid-Eighteenth Century on the Estate of the Earl of Marchmont in Berwickshire. 1927. Edinburgh. J. L. MORGAN, M.A. Glasgow, 1923. ↩
30. Scotlandsplaces.gov.uk,. ‘Land Tax Rolls For Morayshire, Volume 01 | Scotlandsplaces’. N.p., 2015. Web. 14 June 2015. ↩
31. Scotlandsplaces.gov.uk,. ‘Land Tax Rolls For Morayshire, Volume 04 | Scotlandsplaces’. N.p., 2015. Web. 14 June 2015. ↩
32. Wikipedia contributors. “Demography of Scotland.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 10 Jun. 2015. Web. 18 Jun. 2015. ↩
33. Pascalbonenfant.com,. ‘British Weather From 1700 To 1849’. N.p., 2015. Web. 18 June 2015. ↩