Foula 1872

The John o' Groat's Journal says that Mr Georgeson, inspector of the poor of Walls, taking with him the medical officer, Dr Pole, lately visited Foula, a lofty isolated island about three miles in length by a mile and a half in breadth, attached to the parish, which is the most westerly land in Shetland, but separated from it by some twenty miles of ocean, to put in force the Vaccination Act. Having received a list of defaulters from Mr Cheyne, the registrar, notice was served upon all to attend, but very few came with their children. More stringent notices were then issued, bringing up in array all the penalties of the Act 26 and 27 Victoria, but the islanders utterly disregarded them.

While matters were in this state an Englishman appeared on the scene, who was immediately consulted by the island chief if it was possible that there was such a law. He informed them that such a law had been passed for Scotland seven years ago, but that from his experience in England nothing was paid for vaccination. This opinion of counsel spread like wildfire; the matrons of the island collected and addressed inspector, registrar, and medical officer as robbing swindlers in every choice epithet which the Shetland dialect can produce, for seeking half-a-crown for "scarting (scratching) their bairns," which the Queen had ordered them to do for nothing. The officials confess that they were never so hard put to it in their lives, and were thankful that the brawny arms of the furies, which were brandished disagreeably close to their noses, were not used in ducking them in the Loch of Ivrafadna, or in endeavouring to find the bottom of the Dahl. They will not, they say, go again to Eoula for Registrar-General, or Board of Supervision, though the smallpox should only leave three in the island, as it did a hundred years ago, unless they have an escort of the Royal Naval Reserve from Lerwick. The next Government officer expected is the "dogman," alias the supervisor, whose notices a boat inadvertently took in thinking they were a bundle of tracts from a revival preacher who had converted the island in two sermons. The teacher, fearing arrest of salary and consequent starvation, is the only person on the island who minds them, however, or who has ever paid the tax. This was looked upon as a grave sin, and an act of rebellion, and the islanders have for two years withdrawn their children from his school, and sent them to an "anti-dogman." If the "dogman" visits the isle, they have resolved to hide the dogs at the back of the Kame, the highest peak in Foula, whose cliffs rise 1150 feet sheer out of the sea. The office of teacher, registrar, and poor inspector of the isle is vacant. One surfeited with society, burning to be a martyr, and the founder of a second Iona, should set sail for Foula at once.

A footnote to the above story in the Shetland Story by L. K. Schei and G. Moberg

It has also been possible to keep unwelcome guests out. The story goes that when a doctor first came to vaccinate the Foula people, an old man made the men believe that he was coming to geld them. They would not let him get ashore, and he had to sail back again. When next he came he had brought the police, but their boat fared no better:

He takked nord, he takked sud,

he takked ost an west.

Bit fir aa it he could budge and blaa,

da noris kept dir nest.

(From an old verse) Noris = Foula folk.

__________________________________________________

Second Shetland Truck System Report, by William Guthrie

The Truck Commission Enquiry, 1872, is a major social history source for the Shetland Islands in the 19th century. It followed on from an existing Truck Commission enquiry in 1871, after evidence from Shetland was heard in Edinburgh. 45,125 questions covered the rest of the country, 17,070 for Shetland. Despite this effort, little effect immediately resulted in Shetland from legislation following on the national enquiry.

FOULA CENSUS

This island is situated eighteen miles from the nearest point on the west side of the Mainland. It is three miles long, and two miles broad. Its hills or precipices are very lofty, the highest point being 1369 feet above the sea. In 1861, the population was 233. The people are said to be a superior race to those of Fair Island. It is the property of R.T.C. Scott, Esq. of Melby.

The fishing and the shop are entirely in the hands of Messrs. Garriock & Co., who are factors for the proprietor. No other shop is allowed, and no other traders have tempted for some time to trade with the people at the island. I did not hear, directly or indirectly, that any complaints are made by the people with regard to the business arrangements of Mr. Garriock. It is said, indeed, that the people are trucked; but current rumour in Shetland, even among the opponents of truck, does not allege that any gross abuses exist in the island. The island is difficult of access, and the only evidence with regard to it is that of Mr. Garriock himself.

12,880. Would you continue to supply them if you did not have the bulk of their dealings? – No, we would not keep a shop there if we did not have the bulk of their dealings; it would not be worth our while. I may explain that, a few years ago, some of the young men wished to cure their own fish, and go out with them to the Mainland. There was a little discussion amongst them about it, and we put it to them whether they would wish to have that liberty or not; and in order to ascertain their views, we sent in a paper to the schoolmaster, and asked him to circulate it among the men.

[The witness put in a document in the following terms, signed in the affirmative by 65 men:-

“Garriock & Co., who have for the last fourteen years kept a curing establishment on the island of Foula, and found the undivided produce small enough to pay for the trouble and risk of it, while furnishing the necessaries of life, fishing material, etc., at ordinary rates, would, now that some parties have shown an inclination and even begun to cure their own fish, wish to ascertain the views of the people as to whether they desire G. & Co. to continue their establishment as before; or would they prefer each to cure as it suits him, and provide his necessities as he can?

Whilst there is always the most perfect freedom to all to fish, labour and sell their produce in what appears to them the best market, the isolated position of the island appears to require that one system be followed by all.”

“The heads of families and other fishermen will therefore please indicate their views by subscribing below, adding yes if the former system be preferred; or no, if otherwise. – 1867.”]

12,381. ‘Were there any negatives to the paper? – No. It created great alarm amongst the people, because they were afraid they would be left to their own resources.

12,387. ‘But that paper had the effect of making it quite clear to the inhabitants of Foula that they must either give their fish to you green, or you would remove your shop? – We would either have their whole trade or none of it. It is a great risk to send vessels and boats there, and part of their trade would not pay, I may say that we supply goods there at the same price as we do at our shop at Reawick.’

Lerwick, January 24, 1872, LEWIS F.U. GARRIOCK, examined.

12,293. ‘You are a partner of the firm of Garriock & Co., general merchants and fish-curers at Reawick? – I am.’

12,294. ‘You have prepared a statement wich you wish to appear as a part of your evidence? – Yes.’

12,295. ‘Is that statement correct? – It is, to the best of my knowledge.

[The witness then handed in the following statement:-]

‘I am a partner of the firm of Garriock & Co. general merchants and fish-curers at Reawick.

Mr Umphray, the senior of the firm, and myself, are proprietors of land. Mr Umphray, my younger brother, and I, are joint factors on the estate of Dr Scott of Melby.

I am a trustee for the proprietors of the Burra Isles.

Our general store for all sorts of goods is at Reawick. We have, besides, two small shops or general stores, one in the island of Foula where there are about forty families, and the other at Sandness, where there are about seventy-five families.

We engage our fishermen and servants from the district of country comprising the parishes of Weisdale, Aithsting, Sandsting, Walls, Sandness, and Foula, with a few from districts beyond Tingwall, Burra, etc.’

12,368. ‘Your largest shop is at Reawick, and you also have two small ones at Foula and Sandness? – Yes.’

12,369. ‘Do most of the fishermen engaged in the ling fishing usually deal at one or other of the stores you have mentioned? – Yes, there is no other store near.’

12,370. ‘Do you mean that there is no other store near Reawick? – No. I thought you referred to the two smaller shops. All the men get the whole of their supplies from our stores there.’

12,371. ‘At Sandness and Foula there are no other stores within reach of the fishermen residing there? – No.’

12,372. ‘Is there any restriction upon the opening of other shops in Foula, or on the sale of goods there by any other party who chooses to attempt that? – As acting for the proprietor, I don’t think we would allow it. We would not allow small shops in either of these districts if we could help it.’

12,373. ‘Would you allow a trader from Scalloway or Lerwick to sell goods out of his smack there? – Yes; and I have known instances of them going there from [Page 306] Walls and Scalloway. There is no restriction upon the like of that.’

12,374. ‘Are the inhabitants sometimes supplied with meal and articles of dress and provisions by other merchants from the mainland? – The Foula people, annually, when their fishing is over, come to the mainland, and they can then lay in what supplies they are in need of.’

12,375. ‘Do they come in every year themselves? – Not the whole of them, but many of them do.’

12,376. ‘Do you know whether or not any traders visit the islands for the purpose of selling provisions or goods? – No; they have not done that lately. They could have no object in going there.'

12,377. ‘Why? – Because they could not compete with us. We have a shop there for the supply of goods, and we supply them to the people on as moderate terms as other parties could do. Therefore the men have no object in dealing elsewhere.’

12,378. ‘I suppose it would be very small trade that could be driven with 40 families? – Yes, rather.’

12,379. ‘But I presume you consider it fair that, as you supply these families year by year, and are in a sense responsible that their supply shall not run short, you should in return have the bulk of their business? – They may go where they choose.’

12,380. ‘But would you continue to supply them if you did not have the bulk of their dealings? – No, we would not keep a shop there if we did not have the bulk of their dealings; it would not be worth our while. I may explain that, a few years ago, some of the young men wished to cure their own fish, and go out with them to the mainland. There was a little discussion amongst them about it, and we put it to them whether they would wish to have that liberty or not; and in order to ascertain their views, we sent in a paper to the schoolmaster, and asked him to circulate it among the men.

[The witness put in a document in the following terms, signed in the affirmative by 65 men:-

“The heads of families and other fishermen will therefore please indicate their views by subscribing below, adding yes if the former system be preferred; or no, if otherwise. – 1867.”]

12,381. ‘Were there any negatives to the paper? – No. It created great alarm amongst the people, because they were afraid they would be left to their own resources.’

12,382. ‘In consequence of that you continued to supply the islanders? - Yes, we went on as before.’

12,383. ‘ Was it previous to that that the last attempt was made to trade in the island by outside traders? – I think so; I do not think there has been anything of that sort attempted for several years.'

12,384. ‘Do you remember when any attempt of that kind was made - I cannot say. I remember hearing of some boats coming in from Walls or Scalloway, I forget which.'

12,385. ‘Did you object to anyone coming from Orkney? – No, not in this generation. They came from Orkney above 80 years ago.'

12,386. ‘Since you sent in that paper, has any attempt been made by the inhabitants of Foula to cure their fish themselves? – No; we found it needless to have sent in that paper, because they had given it up themselves, as it had not been paying them.’

12,388. ‘The majority of the fishermen engaged in your ling fishing, you have said, have their accounts at one or other of your shops, and those at Foula and Sandness have no other shops within reach? – Yes.’

12,389. ‘Is it not the case that many of the men have accounts and take their supplies at Reawick, who live much more conveniently for other dealers in the district? – Yes, we have accounts with many people in the neighbourhood of other shops.’

12,390. ‘ But the men come to you, I suppose, because they sell their fish to you? – I don’t know. For instance, we give very small supplies to the Walls men. They deal a good deal in the shops in their own neighbourhood, and we pay them for their fish in cash. I have mentioned in my statement, that of £829, 19s. 1d, which was the amount of their earnings, we paid them 18s. 41/2d. in cash at settlement. These men lived from 8 to 10 miles distant from Reawick, and with some of them we have no dealings in goods at all.’

12,391. ‘Do men who live nearer Reawick take a greater amount of supplies from you? – Yes.’

12,392. 'Why do you not adopt, with these men on the mainland the same rule which you have laid down at Foula, that you must have their whole dealings or none? – We don’t require to do it with the men on the mainland. They are at perfect liberty to deal where they choose.'

Go to Top