The new statistical account of Scotland Volume 11

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1836 Excerpt: ...however, as a place of trade, has long been on the decline. In 1692, as is elsewhere shown, it had neither foreign nor home trade, while Glasgow had a part of both. It is remarkable that two places so similarly situated, both on the banks of the Clyde, and within two miles of each other, should, in the process of time, become so very different. In 1831, the population of Rutherglen was only 5503, while that of Glasgow had increased to 202,426. At that period the former had no shipping,--whereas, the latter had ships trading to all parts of the world, besides sixty-seven steam vessels of nearly 10,000 tons burthen, carpenter's measurement. This article has been drawn up by James Cleland, LL. D. President of the Glasgow and Clydesdale Statistical Society, Fellow of the Statistical Society of London, Member of the Society of Civil Engineers, London, Corresponding Member of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, &c. &c. + It would appear that the bishops burgh of Glasgow had been comprehended within the original boundaries of the royal burgh of Rutherglen, and that in the year LANARK. B b In the early part of its history, the town of Rutherglen contained a castle which appears to have been a place of great strength, and ranked among the ancient fortresses of Scotland. In 1306, when Edward King of England was appointed arbiter in the dispute between Bruce and Baliol, respecting the succession to the throne of Scotland, the castle of Rutherglen fell into his hands. Bruce, sensible of the great importance of this fortress, besieged it, and this coming to the knowledge of Edward, he sent his nephew, the young Earl of Glocester, to raise the siege. After various conflicts, this castle seems to have been taken from the English in the year 1313 by Bruce. The ...