Agricultural History Review, Volume 57 Part 1 (2009), p. 146

In the 1880s the Scottish Highlands were characterized by unrest amongst the crofters or small tenants, with direct action and resistance giving rise to the Crofters’ War or Highland Land War. An organized political movement pushing for land reform and centred on what became known as the Highland Land League quickly spread and, following extension of the franchise, achieved the election of several Crofter MPs. The long term grievances of the crofters included the (often forcible) loss of land, overcrowding, and lack of compensation for improvements. Government recognition came in the form of a Royal Commission and the Crofters Act of 1886 (the first of a series of measures intended to benefit the crofters).

The role of external agitators in rousing the crofters was played up by the enemies of land reform. Recent studies of the period have mainly pointed to a varied group of outside sympathisers, many of Highland descent. Newby’s study focuses on the activities of a loosely associated group of radicals comprising Irish, city-based Highlanders, and lowland Scots, mainly based in Glasgow.

In the 1870s it was not at all obvious that there would be common ground on the land question between Ireland and Scotland, although the development of Irish political organization in Glasgow was to be crucial for what followed. Between the Battle of the Braes in 1881 and the 1885 General Election there was significant activity in the Highlands by external agitators who maintained links with Ireland, although these often had to be downplayed given its associations with agrarian outrage and Catholicism.

A fierce debate arose amongst land reformers as to what the future should look like. There were some who supported dual ownership under which the existing system of landownership would be retained but the crofters would be allowed to own whatever improvements they made. Such men had little time for any connection with the Irish agitation. Then there were some who supported free trade in land, condemned the continuance of entails and primogeniture, and supported peasant proprietorship. Others looked rather vaguely to land nationalization. For many, Henry George’s Progress and poverty and his ‘single tax’ approach were, for a time at least, very influential. As Newby points out, it was support for George which linked the radicals in the early 1880s but which, in turn, alienated them from mainstream Irish nationalism.

Agitation continued after the 1886 Act and the radicals maintained an interest in the Highlands. The anxiety about support for the Irish cause was partly overcome and enthusiasm for home rule grew amongst the crofters. As Newby stresses, there was a complex relationship between home rule and land reform politics, and home rule was to be a significant factor in creating splits amongst Highland land reformers.

The influence of ‘Land Leaguism’ was, as Newby points out, felt in the first county council elections in 1890. However, the success of crofter candidates was varied and the League was soon to become a declining force. For the crofters, the 1890s were to be a decade of peace, and urban Highland societies also pulled back from political activity. For the radicals, broad labour questions were becoming of greater interest. The elimination of the Irish element meant that in the twentieth century, debates over land reform could take on a broader aspect.

In assessing the impact of external agitators on the crofters, Newby notes the inspirational influence of Ireland but acknowledges that the crofters were well aware of Irish developments. The arguments put forward by the radicals may well have encouraged consideration of how the crofters’ grievances should be addressed and helped to identify a range of options. However, the crofters turned down radical solutions in favour of the provisions of the 1886 Act.

Newby concludes that the agitation was essentially maintained by local communities. Certainly it is notable that the county of Caithness, where there was a strong and active Land League, hardly figures as a scene of radical endeavour. On the other hand, it is difficult to accept fully Newby’s argument that one of the radicals, Angus Sutherland, alone awoke the politically dormant Sutherlandshire crofters. Not only did anti-landlord activity pre-date Sutherland’s involvement but there were other influential figures at work, unconnected with the Glasgow radicals. Newby largely views events from the perspective of the external agitators: local political developments require further consideration.

Newby rightly alludes to the difficulties in examining the nature of the Irish and radical dimensions, especially given the confusing retrospective statements by some of the protagonists. Furthermore, the radicals left little account of themselves in the form of personal papers. However, the author has managed, mainly by drawing on a wide range of newspapers, to identify what was a diverse group, neither wholly Irish, nor wholly concerned with the rural land question in Scotland, and uncover the complex motives of the leading members. They were not, as Newby emphasizes, seeking only a solution to the Highland land problem, rather they also looked to bring about social reform in Ireland, lowland Scotland, and Britain as a whole.

This book unquestionably breaks new ground and provides by far the most thorough and sophisticated analysis yet attempted of any aspect of the Crofters’ War.