The Story of the Upper Canada Rebellion | Page 6

University of St. Andrews was the
fellow-student and personal friend of young Thomas Chalmers, who
afterwards became one of the most eloquent pulpit orators of modern
times.[4] Robert was the eldest son of his parents, and, being heir to the
paternal estates, he grew up to manhood with the expectation of one
day succeeding to wealth and station in society. He was put to no
profession, and after leaving college, devoted himself to no settled
pursuit. He was on visiting terms with the resident gentry of his native
shire, and took some interest in local military matters. In 1806 he
offered to take charge of an expedition for the invasion of Paris, being
probably impelled thereto by the mad attempt of Lord Camelford
several years before. He was full of energy and robust health, bountiful
and generous to the poor of the parish, a practical philanthropist,
possessed of great intelligence and a genuine love for his kind; but
withal somewhat flighty and erratic, of impetuous temper, deficient in
tact and discretion, and given to revery and theorizing. He was, in short,
a bundle of contradictions, some of his idiosyncrasies being doubtless
inherited from his father, who was a generous and high-minded but
unpractical man. The sire would seem to have been conscious of his
son's weaknesses. "Robert," he was wont to say, "will hurt himself, but
do good to others." The son studied deeply the economical side of the
pauper question, and his researches in this direction brought him into
intimate relations with that eminent writer Mr. Arthur Young,[5] at
whose suggestion he was appointed to conduct an inquiry into the
condition of the poor in England. By virtue of this appointment he
travelled, chiefly on foot, through the most important agricultural

districts of the island, after which he was pronounced by competent
authorities to be the best-informed man in the kingdom respecting the
poor of Great Britain. As I have said elsewhere: "He was consulted by
members of Parliament, political economists, parish overseers, and
even by members of the Cabinet, as to the best means for reforming the
poor laws, and was always ready to spend himself and his substance for
the public good."[6]
Having married and settled down on one of his father's estates, he took
upon himself various offices of public usefulness and philanthropy. His
enterprise and public spirit caused him to be much looked up to by the
yeomanry of Fifeshire, and he soon came to be recognized as the
special champion of the smaller tenantry at agricultural meetings. At
one of these meetings he conceived himself to have been
discourteously treated by his neighbour, the Earl of Kellie. The
discourtesy does not seem to have been of a serious nature, but Mr.
Gourlay became irritated to a degree altogether disproportionate to the
offence. He wrote and published a pamphlet, in which Lord Kellie was
handled with much severity. It was circulated by the author throughout
Fifeshire, and widely read; and from this time forward he was much
given to taking the public into his confidence respecting his personal
grievances. His attack on Lord Kellie, however, weakened his
popularity, and in 1809, partly owing to this cause, and partly to his
being in temporary ill-health, he accepted a proposal from the Duke of
Somerset to become the tenant of a farm belonging to his Grace, and
situated in the parish of Wily, in Wiltshire. For a time all went well
with him in his new abode. His farm was a model for the emulation of
all the landholders in the parish, and his products gained prize after
prize at successive agricultural exhibitions. But Mr. Gourlay was
nothing if not critical, and certain of his surroundings afforded
legitimate grounds for fault-finding. There were many and serious
defects in the system of administering the poor-laws of Great Britain in
those days, and the administration in the parish of Wily was attended
by some specially objectionable features. These erelong became
painfully apparent to the keen eyes of Mr. Gourlay, who began to
agitate for a reform. He went into the matter with characteristic
earnestness, and, by dint of constant speechifying and weekly letters

addressed to the local newspapers, he soon began to produce an
impression. His appetite for agitation grew by what it fed upon,
insomuch that he became a confirmed grievance-monger and hunter-up
of abuses. The magnates of the county began to look coldly upon him,
and even, in some instances, to array themselves in open opposition to
him. This only tended still further to arouse the native pugnacity of his
disposition, and his attacks upon local abuses and those who upheld
them became more and more violent. Now, in all this there can be no
doubt that Mr. Gourlay was from first to last chiefly actuated by
genuine philanthropy.