(eBook PDF) Edexcel A Level Further

Mathematics Core Year 2

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/download/ebook-pdf-edexcel-a-level-further-mathematics-co
re-year-2/
 Getting the most from this book

This book follows on from Edexcel A Level Further Mathematics for Year 1 (AS) and most readers will be familiar
with the material covered in it. However, there may be occasions when they want to check on topics in the
earlier book: we have therefore included three short Review chapters to provide a condensed summary of
the work that was covered in the earlier book, including one or more exercises. In addition there are three
chapters that begin with a Review section and exercise, and then go on to new work based on it. Confident
readers may choose to miss out the Review material, and only refer to these parts of the book when they
are uncertain about particular topics. Others, however, will find it helpful to work through some or all of the
Review material to consolidate their understanding of the first year work.
Two common features of the book are Activities and Discussion points. These serve rather different purposes.
The Activities are designed to help readers get into the thought processes of the new work that they are
about to meet; having done an Activity, what follows will seem much easier. The Discussion points invite
readers to talk about particular points with their fellow students and their teacher and so enhance their
understanding. Another feature is a Caution icon    , highlighting points where it is easy to go wrong.
Answers to all exercise questions and practice questions are provided at the back of the book, and also online
at www.hoddereducation.co.uk/EdexcelFurtherMathsYear2
This is a 4th edition Edexcel textbook so much of the material is well tried and tested. However, as a
consequence of the changes to A Level requirements in further mathematics, large parts of the book are
either new material or have been very substantially rewritten.
 Catherine Berry
 Roger Porkess

vi

886423_FM_MEI_Maths_Y2_4E_i-viii.indd 6 26/01/18 2:52 PM

 Prior knowledge
This book follows on from Edexcel A Level Further Mathematics Year 1 (AS). It is designed so that it can
be studied alongside Edexcel A Level Mathematics Year 2. Knowledge of the work in Edexcel A Level
Mathematics Year 1 (AS) is assumed.
■ 
Chapter 1: Series and induction reviews and develops the work introduced in Chapter 4 of
A Level Further Mathematics Year 1. It requires knowledge of matrices (covered in Chapter 1 of
A Level Further Mathematics Year 1) and of partial fractions (covered in Chapter 7 of A Level
Mathematics Year 2).
■ 
Chapter 2: Further calculus assumes knowledge of the calculus from A Level Mathematics Year 1
(Chapters 10 and 11).You also need to be able to differentiate and integrate exponential functions,
the function x1 and related functions, and trigonometric functions (covered in Chapters 9 and 10 of
A Level Mathematics Year 2).You need to be able to differentiate a function implicitly (Chapter 9
of A Level Mathematics Year 2).You should be familiar with the inverse trigonometric functions
(covered in Chapter 6 of A Level Mathematics Year 2).You also need to have covered the work on
partial fractions in Chapter 7 of A Level Mathematics Year 2.
■ 
Chapter 3: Maclaurin series uses differentiation of simple exponential, logarithmic and
trigonometric functions, which are covered in Chapter 9 of A Level Mathematics Year 2.
■ 
Review: Matrices and transformations reviews the work covered in Chapter 1 of A Level Further
Mathematics Year 1 and builds on the work in Chapter 7 of A Level Further Mathematics Year 1.
■ Review: Complex numbers reviews the work covered in Chapters 2 and 6 of A Level Further
Mathematics Year 1.
■ 
Chapter 4: Polar coordinates assumes knowledge of radians (covered in Chapter 2 of A Level
Mathematics Year 2).You will need to be familiar with the reciprocal trigonometric functions sec
and cosec (introduced in Chapter 6 of A Level Mathematics Year 2) and the double angle formulae
(introduced in Chapter 8 of A Level Mathematics Year 2).You also need to be confident with
integration (covered in Chapter 11 of A Level Mathematics Year 1) and know how to integrate simple
trigonometric functions (Chapter 10 of A Level Mathematics Year 2).
■ 
Chapter 5: Hyperbolic functions uses the ideas of the domain and range of a function, and an
inverse function, covered in Chapter 4 of A Level Mathematics Year 2. It uses similar techniques to
those covered in Chapter 2 of this book.
■ 
Chapter 6: Applications of integration uses all the calculus techniques covered in A Level
Mathematics Year 1 and A Level Mathematics Year 2, and in Chapters 2 and 6 of this book.
■ 
Review: Roots of polynomials reviews the work covered in Chapter 3 of A Level Further
Mathematics Year 1.
■ 
Chapter 7: First order differential equations uses all the calculus techniques covered in A Level
Mathematics Year 1 and A Level Mathematics Year 2, and in Chapters 2 and 6 of this book.
■ 
Chapter 8: De Moivre’s theorem builds on the work covered in Chapter 6 of A Level Further
Mathematics Year 1.You need to be familiar with trigonometric identities such as the double angle
formulae (covered in Chapter 8 of A Level Mathematics Year 2) and you need to know about
geometric series (covered in Chapter 3 of A Level Mathematics Year 2).

vii

886423_FM_MEI_Maths_Y2_4E_i-viii.indd 7 26/01/18 2:52 PM

 Prior knowledge

■ 
Chapter 9: Second order differential equations uses all the calculus techniques covered in A Level
Mathematics Year 1 and A Level Mathematics Year 2, and in Chapters 2 and 6 of this book. It follows on
from Chapter 8 of this book.You also need to know how to write an expression of the form
a cos q + b sin q in the form r sin (q + a). This is covered in Chapter 8 of A Level Mathematics Year 2.
■ 
Review: Vectors reviews the vector forms of points, lines and planes, the intersection of lines and
planes and the calculation of perpendicular distances between points, lines and planes from Chapter 8 of
A Level Further Mathematics Year 1.

viii

886423_FM_MEI_Maths_Y2_4E_i-viii.indd 8 26/01/18 2:52 PM

 1 Series and induction

The essence of Discussion points

mathematics is not to The image of Pascal’s triangle shown
make simple things 1 here has the odd numbers coloured.
complicated, but to 1 1 This results in a pattern similar to
the Sierpinsky triangle, which is an
make complicated things 1 2 1
example of a fractal.
simple. 1 3 3 1
➜ Investigate the patterns produced
1 4 6 4 1
S. Gudder by colouring multiples of 3, 4, etc.
1 5 10 10 5 1
➜ Investigate the sum of the
1 6 15 20 15 6 1 numbers in the first n rows of
1 7 21 35 35 21 7 1 Pascal’s triangle.
1 1 ➜ How could you prove your result?

Figure 1.1

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 1 29/01/18 1:19 PM

 Review: Sequences and series

1 Review: Sequences and series

Terminology and notation
A sequence is an ordered set of objects with an underlying rule.
■ The terms of a sequence are often written as a1, a2, a3, … or u1, u2, u3, … .
n The general term of a sequence may be written as ar or ur. (Sometimes the
letter k or i is used instead of r.)
n The last term is usually written as an or un .

A series is the sum of the terms of a numerical sequence.

n The sum of the first n terms of a sequence is often denoted by Sn .
n
n Sn = a1 + a2 + ... + an = ∑a . r
r =1

Types of sequence
n A sequence is increasing if each term is greater than the previous term.
n A sequence is decreasing if each term is smaller than the previous term.
n In an oscillating sequence, the terms lie above and below a middle number.
n In an arithmetic sequence, the difference between each term and the
next is constant. It is called the common difference and denoted by d.
n In a geometric sequence, the ratio of each term to the next is constant.
It is called the common ratio and denoted by r.
n The terms of a convergent sequence get closer and closer to a limiting
value. A geometric sequence is convergent if −1 < r < 1.

Summing series using standard

formulae
Many series can be summed by using the standard formulae:
n n
∑1 = n Remember that ∑1 = 1 + 1 + 1 + .... + 1, so
r =1
r =1
n
this means that n lots of 1 are added together,
∑r = 1 n(n
2
+ 1)
giving a total of n.
r =1
n

∑r 2
= 1 n(n
6
+ 1)(2n + 1)
r =1
n
This result is precisely the square
∑r 3
= 1 n 2 (n
4
+ 1)2
of the result ∑r.
r =1

ACTIVITY 1.1
Prove that 1 + 2 + 3 + .... + n = 1 n(n + 1) by using the formula for the sum of
2
an arithmetic series.

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 2 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 n n
You will prove the formulae for ∑ r 2 and ∑ r 3 later in this chapter.
r =1 r =1
1
Example 1.1 Find the sum of the series (2 × 3) + (3 × 4) + (4 × 5) + … + (n + 1)(n + 2).

Chapter 1 Series and induction

Solution
To simplify this
n
expression, look
The series can be written in the form ∑(r + 1)(r + 2). for common
factors. It’s usually
r =1
n n n n
helpful to take out

∑(r + 1)(r + 2) = ∑ r 2
+ 3∑ r + 2∑1
any fractions as
factors.
r =1 r =1 r =1 r =1

= 61 n(n + 1)(2n + 1) + 3 × 21 n(n + 1) + 2n

= 61 n [(n + 1)(2n + 1) + 9(n + 1) + 12]

= 61 n 2n 2 + 3n + 1 + 9n + 9 + 12

= 61 n 2n 2 + 12n + 22

= 1 n(n 2 + 6n + 11)
3

2 The method of differences

Sometimes it is possible to find the sum of a series by subtracting it from a
related series, with most of the terms cancelling out. This is called the method of
differences and is shown in the following example.

Example 1.2
Calculate the value of the series: 5 + 10 + 20 + 40 + … + 2560 + 5120.

Solution
Each term is double the previous one.
In fact, the sequence is
ur = 5 × 2r -1 but you won’t
Call the sum S: need that here.

S = 5 + 10 + 20 + … + 2560 + 5120
Double it:
2S = 10 + 20 + 40 + … + 5120 + 10 240
Subtract the first line from the second and notice that most terms cancel.
In fact, only two remain.
2S − S = 10 240 − 5
S = 10 235
This is the sum you needed.

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 3 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 The method of differences

This example worked because of the doubling of the terms.

Calculating the sums of much more complicated series can also use this
technique, if each term can be expressed as the difference of two (or more)
terms. Look at the following examples carefully to see the idea, paying particular
attention to the way the series are laid out to help find the cancelling terms.

Example 1.3
(i) Show that 1 − 1 = 1 .
r r + 1 r (r + 1)

(ii) Hence find 1 + 1 + 1 +…+ 1 .

1× 2 2 × 3 3 × 4 30 × 31

Solution
(r + 1) − r
(i) LHS = 1 − 1 =
r r +1 r (r + 1)
1
=
r (r + 1)
= RHS as required.

30
1 + 1 + 1 +…+ 1
(ii) 1× 2 2 × 3 3× 4 30 × 31
= ∑ r (r 1+ 1)
r =1

∑ ( 1r − r +1 1)
30
=
r =1

Using the result from part (i)...

1
== 11−− 12
... start writing out the 2
1 1
sum, but it is helpful
++12 −− 13
to lay it out like this to 2 3
see which parts cancel.
+ 1 − +11 − 1
3 43 4
The terms in the ++
red loops cancel
out – so all the + 1 −+ 1 − 1
terms in the green 29 30 29 30
box vanish. + 1 − 1 − 1
30 + 31
30 31

= 1− 1
31
30
=
31

Notice that the result in the example can easily be generalised for a sequence
Discussion point
of any length. If the sequence has n terms, then the terms would still cancel in
➜ What happens to pairs, leaving the first term, 1, and the last term, − n +1 1 .
this series when n
becomes very large? The sum of the terms would therefore be

1− 1 = n +1−1 = n .
n+1 n+1 n+1

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 4 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 The cancelling of nearly all the terms is similar to the way in which the interior
sections of a collapsible telescope disappear when it is compressed, so a sum like
this is sometimes described as a telescoping sum. 1
The next example uses a telescoping sum to prove a familiar result.

Chapter 1 Series and induction

Example 1.4
Show that ( 2r + 1) − ( 2r − 1) = 8r .
2 2
(i)
n

(ii) Hence find ∑8r .

r =1
n
Deduce that ∑r = n (n + 1) .
1
(iii)
r =1
2

Solution
(i) ( 2r + 1) − ( 2r − 1) = (4r 2 + 4r + 1) − (4r 2 − 4r + 1)
2 2

= 8r
  as required.
n n

(ii) ∑8r = ∑(2r + 1) 2

− ( 2r − 1) 
2

r =1 r =1

= 32 − 12 The only terms remaining

+5 −3 2 2 are the 2nd and the 2nd
to last.
+ 7 − 52 2

+…
+ (2(n − 1) + 1)2 − (2(n − 1) − 1)2
+ 2(n + 1)2 − (2n − 1)2
     
= ( 2n + 1)2 − 12
= 4n 2 + 4n + 1 − 1
        = 4n + 4n
2

n
(iii) Since ∑ 8r = 4n 2 + 4n
n r =1

   so ∑r = 1 n2 + 1 n
2 2
r =1

= 1 n (n + 1)
2

as required.

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 5 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 The method of differences

Example 1.5 (i) Show that 2 − 3 + 1 = r +4 .

r r + 1 r + 2 r (r + 1)(r + 2)
n
r +4
(ii) Hence find ∑ r (r + 1)(r + 2) .
r =1

Solution
2 − 3 + 1 = 2(r + 1)(r + 2) − 3r (r + 2) + r (r + 1)
(i) r r +1 r +2 r (r + 1)(r + 2)

= 2r + 6r + 4 − 3r − 6r + r + r
2 2 2

r (r + 1)(r + 2)
= r +4
r (r + 1)(r + 2)

r + 2) ∑ ( r r + 1 r + 2 )
n n
+4
(ii) ∑ r (r +r 1)( = 2− 3 + 1
r =1 r =1

=2− 3 + 1
2 3
2 3+1 The terms in the red
+ − loops cancel out – so all
2 3 4
the terms in the green
+2−3+1 box vanish.
3 4 5
+…−…+…
+…−…+…
+ 2 − 3 +1
n −1 n −1 n
+ 2 −3+ 1
n −1 n n+1
+2− 3 + 1
   n n+1 n+2

   Most of the terms cancel, leaving:

n
+4
∑ r (r +r 1)( r + 2)
=2− 3+2+ 1 − 3 + 1
2 2 n+1 n+1 n+2
r =1

= 3− 2 + 1
   2 n+1 n+2

Note
The terms that do not cancel form a symmetrical pattern, three at the start and
three at the end.

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 6 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 Discussion points
➜ Show that the final expression in the previous example can be simplified to 1
n ( 3n + 7 )
give .
2 (n + 1)(n + 2 )
➜ What happens to the series as n becomes very large?

Chapter 1 Series and induction

Exercise 1.1
① This question is about the series 1 + 3 + 5 + … + (2n – 1).
n
You can write this as ∑ (2r − 1).
r =1

Show that r 2 − ( r − 1) = 2r − 1.
2
(i)

(ii) Write out the first three terms and the last three terms of
n

∑ (r 2
− (r − 1)2 ).
r =1 n
(iii) Hence find ∑ (2r − 1) .
r =1 n
(iv) Show that using the standard formulae to find ∑ (2r − 1) gives the
same result as in (iii). r =1

② This question is about the series 2 + 2 + 2 +…+ 2 .

1× 3 3× 5 5× 7 19 × 21
(i) Show that the general term of the series is 2 , and find
(2r − 1)(2r + 1)
the values of r for the first term and the last term of the series.
(ii) Show that 1 − 1 = 2
.
2r − 1 2r + 1 (2r − 1)(2r + 1)

(iii) Hence find 2 + 2 + 2 +…+ 2 .

1× 3 3× 5 5× 7 19 × 21
③ (i) Show that ( r + 1)2 ( r + 2 ) − r 2 ( r + 1) = ( r + 1)( 3r + 2 ).
(ii) Hence find ( 2 × 5) + ( 3 × 8 ) + ( 4 × 11) + … + (n + 1)( 3n + 2 ).
(iii) Show that you can obtain the same result by using the standard
formulae to find the sum of this series.
(iv) Using trial and improvement, find the smallest value of n for which the
sum is greater than one million.

Show that 12 − = 2r + 1 .
④ (i)
1
r ( r + 1)2 r 2 ( r + 1)2
n
2r + 1
(ii) Hence find ∑ .
r =1 r 2
( r + 1)2
⑤ (i) Show that 1 − 1 = 1 .
2r 2 ( r + 2 ) r ( r + 2 )
n
(ii) Hence find ∑ 1 .
r =1
r ( r + 2)
(iii) Find the value of this sum for n = 100, n = 1000 and n = 10 000 and
comment on your answer.

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 7 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 The method of differences

⑥ (i) Show that − 1 + 3 − 2 = r .

r + 2 r + 3 r + 4 (r + 2)(r + 3)(r + 4)
12
(ii) Hence find ∑ r .
r =1
(r + 2)(r + 3)(r + 4 )

Show that 1 − 1 + 1 1
⑦ (i) = .
2r r + 1 2 ( r + 2 ) r ( r + 1)( r + 2 )
n
(ii) Hence find ∑ 1 .
r =1
r ( r + 1)( r + 2 )
(iii) Find the value of this sum for n = 100 and n = 1000, and comment on
your answer.
In Questions 8 and 9 you will prove the standard results for ∑r 2 and ∑r 3.

⑧ (i) Show that ( 2r + 1)3 − ( 2r − 1)3 = 24r 2 + 2.

n
(ii) Hence find ∑ ( 24r 2 + 2 ).
r =1
n
(iii) Deduce that ∑r 2 = 1 n (n + 1)( 2n + 1).
r =1
6

⑨ (i) Show that ( 2r + 1)4 − ( 2r − 1)4 = 64r 3 + 16r .

n
(ii) Hence find ∑ ( 64r 3 + 16r ).
r =1
n
1
Deduce that ∑r 3 = 4 n 2 (n + 1) .
2
(iii)
r =1
(You may use the standard result for Σr.)

⑩ (i) Show that 2 can be written as 1 − 1 .

r2 − 1 r −1 r +1
(ii) Hence find the values of A and B in the identity
1 ≡ A + B .
r −1 r −1 r +1
2

n
(iii) Find ∑ 2 1 .
r =2 r − 1

(iv) What is the value of this sum as n becomes very large?

Prior knowledge
For the next section you need to know how to use partial fractions. This is covered
in Chapter 7 of the Year 2 A Level Mathematics book. Partial fractions are also
reviewed on page 27 of this book.

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 8 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 3 Summing series using partial
fractions 1
If the general term of a sequence can be expressed in partial fractions, this may

Chapter 1 Series and induction

give the opportunity to use the method of differences.
Example 1.6 n
Find ∑ 1 .
r (r + 1)
r =1

Solution
1 = A+ B First, write the expression as
r (r + 1) r r +1
partial fractions.
1 = A(r + 1) + Br

Let r = 0 ⇒A=1
Let r = −1 ⇒ B = −1

∑ r (r 1+ 1) = ∑ ( 1r − r +1 1)
n n

r =1 r =1

= 1 − 21
1
+ 21 − 13 Write out the first few terms and the
last few terms. Most of the terms
+ 13 − 41 cancel, leaving just one term at the
+... start and one at the end.

+ n −1 2 − n −1 1
+ n −1 1 − n1
+ n1 − n +1 1

= 1− 1
Discussion point n+1
➜ In the example above, = n +1−1
how does the form of n+1
the partial fractions = n
tell you that you can n+1
use the method of
differences to sum
the series? Sometimes the partial fractions involve three terms, as in the next example. This
means that it is particularly important to lay out your work carefully, so that you
can see clearly which terms cancel.

Example 1.7 n
2
(i) Find ∑ r (r + 1)(r + 2) .
r =1

∞
(ii) Hence state the value of ∑ 2 .
r (r + 1)(r + 2)
r =1

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 9 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 Summing series using partial fractions

Solution
(i)
2 = A+ B + C Write the
r (r + 1)(r + 2) r r +1 r +2
expression as
2 = A(r + 1)(r + 2) + Br (r + 2) + Cr (r + 1) partial fractions.
Let r = 0 ⇒ 2 = 2A ⇒ A=1
Let r = −1 ⇒ 2 = − B ⇒ B = −2
Let r = −2 ⇒ 2 = 2C ⇒C =1

∑ r (r + 1)(2 r + 2) = ∑ ( 1r − r +2 1 + r +1 2 )
n n

r =1 r =1

=1 −2 +1 Most of the terms

1 2 3 cancel out in groups
1 2 of 3.
+ − +1
2 3 4
+1 −2 +1
3 4 5
+...
+ 1 − 2 +1
n−2 n −1 n
+ 1 −2 + 1 There are three terms
n −1 n n+1 left at the beginning
+1 − 2 + 1
and three at the end.
n n+1 n+2 Notice the symmetrical
pattern.

= 1−1+ 1 + 1 − 2 + 1
2 n+1 n+1 n+2
1
= − 1 + 1
2 n+1 n+2
(ii) As n → ∞, 1 → 0 and 1 → 0
n+1 n+2
∞
2 1
so ∑ r (r + 1)(r + 2) = 2
r =1

Exercise 1.2
n
① Find ∑(4r − 1).
r =1
n
② Find ∑(3r 2 + r ).
r =1
n
③ Find ∑(2r 3 + r ).
r =1

2
④ (i) Write in the form A + B .
r (r + 2) r r+2
n
2
(ii) Hence find ∑ .
r (r + 2)
r =1

10

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 10 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 n
Find ∑ r (r + 1)(r + 2).
1
⑤ (i)
r =1

(ii) Hence find 1 × 2 × 3 + 2 × 3 × 4 + 3 × 4 × 5 + ... + 100 × 101 × 102.

⑥ (i) Show that 13 (r + 1)(r + 2)(r + 3) − 13 r (r + 1)(r + 2) = (r + 1)(r + 2).

Chapter 1 Series and induction

(ii) Using the result from (i) and the method of differences,
n
find ∑(r + 1)(r + 2).
r =1 n
(iii) Use standard results to find ∑(r + 1)(r + 2).
r =1
Show that this is the same as the result from (ii).
n
7r + 10
⑦ (i) Find ∑ r (r + 1)(r + 2) .
r =1

∞
(ii) Hence find ∑ 7r + 10 .
r (r + 1)(r + 2)
r =1

n
⑧ (i) Find ∑ 12r + 2 .
(2r − 1)(2r + 1)(2r + 3)
r =1

(ii) Hence find 7 + 13 + 19 + ...

1× 3 × 5 3 × 5 × 7 5 × 7 × 9

( 13 ) + 3 ( 13 ) ( 13 )
2 3
⑨ A sum is given by S = 1 − 2 −4 + ...
(i) Write down an expression for 13 S .
(ii)  dd S and 13 S . Describe the resulting series and find its sum to infinity.
A
Hence find the value of S.
( )
−2
(iii) Show that S is the binomial expansion of 1 + 1 . Use this result to
3
confirm the value of S you found in part (ii).

4 Review: Proof by induction

When you are solving a mathematical problem, you may sometimes make a
conjecture.You might, for example, find a formula that seems to work in the
cases you have investigated.You would then want to prove your conjecture.
Mathematical induction is a very powerful method that can be used to prove a
conjecture or a given result, such as for the sum of a series.
The principle of proof by induction is to show that:
if the result is true for the case n = k
then it must be true for the case n = k + 1.
If you also show that it is true for an initial case, say n = 1, you can then deduce
that it must be true for n = 2, and therefore it must be true for n = 3, and so on.
You can then state that it is true for all positive integer values of n.

11

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 11 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 Review: Proof by induction

Steps in mathematical induction

To prove something by mathematical induction you need to state a
conjecture to start with. Then there are five elements needed to try to prove
the conjecture is true.
n Proving that it is true for a starting value (e.g. n = 1).
n Finding the target expression: using the result for n = k to find the
equivalent result for n = k + 1. To find the target expression you replace
k with k + 1 in the result for n = k.
n Proving that: if it is true for n = k, then it is true for n = k + 1.
This can be done before or after finding the target expression,
but you may find it easier to find the target expression first so
that you know what you are working towards.

n Arguing that since it is true for n = 1, it is also true for n = 1 + 1 = 2, and so

for n = 2 + 1 = 3 and for all subsequent values of n.
n Concluding the argument by writing down the result and stating that it has
been proved.
This ensures the argument is properly rounded off. You will
often use the word ‘therefore’.

Example 1.8
Finding the sum of a series
Prove by induction that, for all positive integers n:
1 + 3 + 5 + ... + (2n − 1) = n 2

Solution
When n = 1, L.H.S. = 1 R.H.S. = 12 = 1
So it is true for n = 1.
Assume the result is true for n = k, so:

1 + 3 + 5 + ... + (2k − 1) = k 2 Target expression

You want to prove that the result is true 1 + 3 + 5 + … + (2k − 1)

for n = k + 1 (if the assumption is true). + [2(k + 1) − 1] = (k + 1)2

Look at the L.H.S. of the result you want to prove:

1 + 3 + 5 + ... + (2k − 1) + [2(k + 1) − 1]

Use the assumed result for n = k, to replace the first k terms:

The first k = k 2 + [2(k + 1) − 1] The (k + 1)th term
terms
= k 2 + 2k + 2 − 1 Expand and simplify.
= k + 2k + 1
2

= (k + 1)2 This is the same as the target expression.

as required.

12

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 12 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 If the result is true for n = k, then it is true for n = k + 1.
Since it is true for n = 1, it is true for all positive integer values of n. 1
Therefore the result that 1 + 3 + 5 + ... + (2n − 1) = n 2 is true.

Chapter 1 Series and induction

The method of proof by induction is often used in the context of the sum of a
series, as in the example above. However, it has a number of other applications
as well.
Induction can be used in divisibility proofs, as shown in the next example. In
proofs like these, there is no ‘target expression’; instead your target is to express
the result in a form that shows the divisibility property that you are proving.

Example 1.9 Divisibility

Prove that un = 4 n + 6n − 1 is divisible by 9 for all n > 1.

Solution
When n = 1, u1 = 41 + 6 − 1 = 9 which is divisible by 9. So it is true
for n = 1.
Assume the result is true for n = k, so:
uk = 4 k + 6k − 1 is divisible by 9
You want to prove that uk +1 is divisible by 9 (if the assumption is true).
uk +1 = 4 k +1 + 6(k + 1) − 1
You want to express uk + 1 in
= 4 × 4 k + 6k + 5 terms of uk.

= 4(uk − 6k + 1) + 6k + 5
= 4uk − 24k + 4 + 6k + 5
= 4uk − 18k + 9
= 4uk + 9(1 − 2k )
Substituting 4
k
= uk − 6k + 1.
You have assumed that uk is divisible
by 9, and 9(1 − 2k) is divisible by 9,
so uk + 1 is divisible by 9.

If uk is divisible by 9, then uk + 1 is divisible by 9.

Since it is true for n = 1, it is true for all positive integer values of n.
Therefore the result that un = 4 n + 6n − 1 is divisible by 9 is true.

Example 1.10 Matrix powers

Matrices are reviewed after  −3 8   1 − 4n 8n 
 , prove by induction that A = 
n
Given that A =  .
Chapter 3.
 −2 5   − 2n 1 + 4n 

13

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 13 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 Review: Proof by induction

Solution
 1− 4 8   −3 8 
When n = 1, A1 =  = =A
 −2 1 + 4   −2 5 
so the result is true for n = 1. Target expression
Assume the result is true for n = k, so  1 − 4(k + 1) 8(k + 1) 
A k +1 =  

 1 − 4k 8k 
Ak =    −2(k + 1) 1 + 4(k + 1) 
 −2k 1 + 4k   −3 − 4k 8k + 8 
You want to prove that the result is = 
 −2k − 2 4k + 5 
true for n = k + 1 (if the assumption
is true).
A k +1 = A k A
 1 − 4k 8k   −3 8  Multiply the assumed result
=   for Ak by the matrix A.
 −2k 1 + 4k   −2 5 
 −3(1 − 4k ) − 16k 8(1 − 4k ) + 40k 
=  

 6k − 2(1 + 4k ) −16k + 5(1 + 4k ) 
 −3 − 4k 8k + 8 
=  This is the same as the target
 −2k − 2 4k + 5  expression.

If the result is true for n = k, then it is true for n = k + 1.

Since it is true for n = 1, it is true for all positive integer values of n.
 1 − 4n 8n 
Therefore the result that A n =   is true.
 −2n 1 + 4n 

Example 1.11
nth term of a sequence
A sequence is defined by u1 = 1 and un+1 = 3un − 4.
Prove by induction that un = 2 − 3n −1.

Solution
When n = 1, u1 = 2 − 30 = 2 − 1 = 1 Target expression
so the result is true for n = 1. uk +1 = 2 − 3( k +1)−1
Assume the result is true for n = k, so: = 2 − 3k
uk = 2 − 3k −1

You want to prove that the result is true for n = k + 1

(if the assumption is true). Use the given relationship between
uk +1 = 3uk − 4 un + 1 and un.
= 3(2 − 3k −1 ) − 4
Substitute the assumed result for uk.
= 6 − 3 × 3k −1 − 4
= 2 − 3k This is the same as the target expression.

14

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 14 26/01/18 2:01 PM

 If the result is true for n = k, then it is true for n = k + 1.
Since it is true for n = 1, it is true for all positive integer values of n. 1
Therefore the result that un = 2 − 3n − 1 is true.

Chapter 1 Series and induction

Review exercise
 −2 9 
① Given that A =   , you are going to prove by induction that
 −1 4 
 1 − 3n 9n  .
An =  
 −n 1 + 3n 
(i) Show that the result is true for n = 1.
k +1
(ii) If the result is true, write down the target expression for A .

 1 − 3k 9k 
(iii) Assuming that the result is true for n = k, so A = 
k
,
 −k 1 + 3k 
use matrix multiplication to find an expression for A k +1.
(iv) Show that your answers to (ii) and (iii) are the same, and write a
conclusion for your proof.
n
② You are going to prove by induction that ∑ (3r − 1) = 1 n(3n
2
+ 1).
r =1
(i) Show that the result is true for n = 1.
k +1
(ii) If the result is true, write down a target expression for ∑(3r − 1).
r =1
k
(iii) Assuming that the result is true for n = k, so ∑ (3r − 1) = 1
2 k(3k + 1),
r =1
k +1
find an expression for ∑(3r − 1) by adding the (k + 1)th term to the
r =1
sum of the first k terms.
(iv) Show that your answers to (ii) and (iii) are the same, and write a
conclusion for your proof.
③ A sequence is defined by u1 = 3 and un+1 = 2un + 1.
You are going to prove by induction that un = 2n+1 − 1.
(i) Show that the result is true for n = 1.
(ii) If the result is true, write down a target expression for uk +1.

(iii) Assuming that the result is true for n = k, so uk = 2k −1 − 1, find an

expression for uk +1 by applying the rule uk +1 = 2uk + 1.
(iv) Show that your answers to (ii) and (iii) are the same, and write a
conclusion for your proof.
④ Prove by induction that 12 + 2 2 + 32 + .... + n 2 = 1 n(n + 1)(2n + 1).
6
 6 5 
⑤ Given that A =   , prove by induction that
 −5 −4 
 1 + 5n 5n 
An =  .
 −5n 1 − 5n 

15

886423_01_Edx_Maths_Y2_4E_001-017.indd 15 26/01/18 2:01 PM

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
means in law for preventing the exportation of the articles in
question.[288]

A petition on an extraordinary subject Feb. 20.

from the magistrates and town-council of
Elgin, was before the Privy Council. Robert Gibson of Linkwood had
been imprisoned in their Tolbooth as furious, at the desire of the
neighbouring gentry, and for the preservation of the public peace. In
the preceding October, when the magistrates were in Edinburgh on
business before the Privy Council, Gibson set fire to the Tolbooth in
the night-time, and there being no means of quenching the flames, it
was burnt to the ground. Their first duty was to obtain authority
from the Privy Council to send the incendiary in shackles to another
place of confinement, and now they applied for an exemption from
the duty of receiving and confining prisoners for private debts till
their Tolbooth could be rebuilt. They obtained the required
exemption until the term of Whitsunday 1703.

Wodrow relates a story of the mysterious Feb.

disappearance of a gentleman (chamberlain
of a countess) dwelling at Linlithgow, and esteemed as a good man. A
gentleman at Falkirk, with whom he had dealings, sent a servant one
afternoon desiring him to come immediately. His wife would not
allow him to travel that evening, and the servant departed without
him. Long before daylight next morning, the chamberlain rose and
prepared for his journey, but did not omit family worship. In the part
of Scripture which he read (Acts xx.), occurred the sentence, ‘you
shall see my face no more.’ Whether this 1701.
occurred by chance or not is not known, but
he repeated the passage twice. After departing, he returned for his
knife; again he returned to order one of his sons not to go out that
day. By daylight his horse was found, with an empty saddle, near
Linlithgow Bridge (a mile west of the town), and no search or inquiry
made then, or for a considerable time after, sufficed to discover what
had become of him. Wodrow states the suspicion of his being
murdered, but as he had taken only some valuable papers with him,
and viewing the fact of his being a steward, it does not seem difficult
to account for his disappearance on a simpler hypothesis.[289]

The contract for a marriage between Sir Mar. 1.

John Shaw of Greenock and Margaret
Dalrymple, eldest daughter of the Lord President of the Court of
Session, being signed to-day, ‘there was an entire hogshead of claret
drunk’ by the company assembled on the occasion. At the marriage,
not long after, of Anne, a younger daughter of the Lord President, to
James Steuart, son of the Lord Advocate, ‘the number of people
present was little less,’ being just about as many as the house would
hold. A marriage was, in those days, an occasion for calling the whole
connections of a couple of families together; and where the parties
belonged, as in these cases, to an elevated rank in society, there was
no small amount of luxury indulged in. Claret was, in those days,
indeed, but fifteen, and sack eighteen pence, while ale was three-
halfpence, per bottle, so that a good deal of bibulous indulgence cost
little.
The expenditure upon the clothes of a bride of quality was very
considerable. Female fineries were not then produced in the country
as they are now, and they cost probably twice the present prices. We
find that, at the marriage of a daughter of Smythe of Methven to Sir
Thomas Moncrieff of that Ilk, Bart., in December of this very year,
there was a head suit and ruffles of cut work at nearly six pounds ten
shillings; a hood and scarf at two pounds fifteen shillings; a silk
under-coat nearly of the same cost; a gown, petticoat, and lining, at
between sixteen and seventeen pounds; garters, at £1, 3s. 4d.: the
entire outfit costing £109, 18s. 3d.[290]
When Mrs Margaret Rose, daughter of the Laird of Kilravock, was
married in 1701, there was an account from Francis Brodie,
merchant in Edinburgh, for her wedding- 1701.
clothes, including seventeen and a quarter
ells of flowered silk, £11, 13s.; nine and a quarter ells of green silk
shagreen for lining, £2, 14s.; six and a half ells of green galloon, 19s.
6d.; with other sums for a gown and coat, for an under-coat, and an
undermost coat; also, for a pair of silk stockings, 12s.; a necklace and
silk handcurcher, 8s.; and some thirty or forty other articles,
amounting in all to £55, 8s. 9d. sterling. This young lady carried a
tocher of 9000 merks—about nine times the value of her marriage
outfit—to her husband, John Mackenzie, eldest son of Sir Alexander
Mackenzie of Coul.
At the marriage of Anne Dalrymple to Mr James Steuart, ‘the
bride’s favours were all sewed on her gown from top to bottom, and
round the neck and sleeves. The moment the ceremony was
performed, the whole company ran to her, and pulled off the favours;
in an instant, she was stripped of them all. The next ceremony was
the garter [we have seen what it cost], which the bridegroom’s man
attempted to pull from her leg, but she dropped it on the floor; it was
a white and silver ribbon, which was cut in small parcels, [a piece] to
every one in company. The bride’s mother then came in with a basket
of favours belonging to the bridegroom; those and the bride’s were
the same with the bearings of their families—hers, pink and white;
his, blue and gold colour.’ ‘The company dined and supped together,
and had a ball in the evening; the same next day at Sir James
Steuart’s. On Sunday, there went from the President’s house to
church three-and-twenty couple, all in high dress. Mr Barclay, then a
boy, led the youngest Miss Dalrymple, who was the last of them.
They filled the galleries of the [High] Church from the king’s seat to
the wing loft. The feasting continued till they had gone through all
the friends of the family, with a ball every night.’[291]

It was not yet three years since the people Mar. 14.
of Scotland were dying of starvation, and
ministers were trying to convince their helpless flocks that it was all
for their sins, and intended for their good. Yet now we have a
commission issued by the government, headed as usual with the
king’s name, commanding that all loads of grain which might be
brought from Ireland into the west of Scotland, should be staved and
sunk, and this, so far as appears, without a remark from any quarter
as to the horrible impiety of the prohibition 1701.
in the first place, and the proposed
destruction of the gifts of Providence in the second.[292]
An example of the simple inconvenience of these laws in the
ordinary affairs of life is presented in July 1702. Malcolm M‘Neill, a
native of Kintyre, had been induced, after the Revolution, to go to
Ireland, and become tenant of some of the waste lands there. Being
now anxious to settle again in Argyleshire, on some waste lands
belonging to the Duke of Argyle, he found a difficulty before him of a
kind now unknown, but then most formidable. How was he to get his
stock transported from Ballymaskanlan to Kintyre? Not in respect of
their material removal, but of the laws prohibiting all transportation
of cattle from Ireland to Scotland. It gives a curious idea of the law-
made troubles of the age, that Malcolm had to make formal
application to the Privy Council in Edinburgh for this purpose. On
his petition, leave to carry over two hundred black-cattle, four
hundred sheep, and forty horses, was granted. It is a fact of some
significance, that the duke appears in the sederunt of the day when
this permission was given. That without such powerful influence no
such favour was to be obtained, is sufficiently proved by the rare
nature of the transaction.
We find, in January 1700, that the 1700. Jan. 9.
execution of the laws against the
importation of Irish cattle and horses had been committed to
Alexander Maxwell, postmaster at Ayr, who seems to have performed
his functions with great activity, but not much good result. He
several times went over the whole bounds of his commission,
establishing spies and waiters everywhere along the coast. By himself
and his servants, sometimes with the assistance of soldiers, he made
a great number of seizures, but his profits never came up to his costs.
Often, after a seizure, he had to sustain the assaults of formidable
rabbles, and now and then the cattle or horses were rescued out of
his hands. For six weeks at a time he was never at home, and all that
time not thrice in his bed—for he had to ride chiefly at night—but on
all hands he met with only opposition, even from the king’s troops,
‘albeit he maintains them and defrays all their charges when he
employs them.’ On his petition (January 9, 1700), he was allowed a
hundred pounds by the Privy Council as an encouragement to
persevere in his duty.
In the autumn of 1703, an unusual anxiety was shewn to enforce
the laws against the importation of provisions from Ireland and from
England. Mr Patrick Ogilvie of Cairns, a 1700.
brother of the Lord Chancellor, Earl of
Seafield, was commissioned to guard the coasts between the Sound
of Mull and Dumfries, and one Cant of Thurston to protect the east
coast between Leith and Berwick, with suitable allowances and
powers. It happened soon after that an Irish skipper, named
Hyndman, appeared with a vessel of seventy tons, full of Irish meal,
in Lamlash Bay, and was immediately pounced upon by Ogilvie. It
was in vain that he represented himself as driven there by force of
weather on a voyage from Derry to Belfast: in spite of all his
pleadings, which were urged with an air of great sincerity, his vessel
was condemned.
Soon after, a Scottish ship, sailing under the conduct of William
Currie to Londonderry, was seized by the Irish authorities by way of
reprisal for Hyndman’s vessel. The Scottish Privy Council (February
15, 1704) sent a remonstrance to the Duke of Ormond, Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, setting forth this act as ‘an abuse visibly to the
breach of the good correspondence that ought to be kept betwixt her
majesty’s kingdoms.’ How the matter ended does not appear; but the
whole story, as detailed in the record of the Privy Council, gives a
striking idea of the difficulties, inconveniences, and losses which
nations then incurred through that falsest of principles which
subordinates the interests of the community to those of some special
class, or group of individuals.
Ogilvie was allowed forty foot-soldiers and twenty dragoons to
assist him in his task; but we may judge of the difficulty of executing
such rules from the fact stated by him in a petition, that, during the
interval of five weeks, while these troops were absent at a review in
the centre of the kingdom, he got a list of as many as a hundred boats
which had taken that opportunity of landing from Ireland with
victual. Indeed, he said that, without a regular independent
company, it was impossible to prevent this traffic from going on.[293]
We do not hear much more on this subject till January 1712, when
Thomas Gray, merchant in Irvine, and several other persons, were
pursued before the Court of Session for surreptitious importation of
Irish victual, by Boswell and other Ayrshire justices interested in the
prices of Scottish produce. The delinquents were duly fined.
Fountainhall, after recording the decision, adds a note, in which he
debates on the principles involved in the free trade in corn. ‘This
importation of meal,’ says he, ‘is good for 1700.
the poor, plenty making it cheap, but it
sinks the gentlemen’s rents in these western shires. Which of the two
is the greater prejudice to the bulk of the nation? Problema esto:
where we must likewise balance the loss and damage we suffer by the
exporting so much of our money in specie to a foreign country to buy
it, which diminishes our coin pro tanto: But if the victual was
purchased in Ireland by exchange of our goods given for it, that takes
away that objection founded on the exporting of our money.’[294]

John Lawson, burgess of Edinburgh, was 1701. Apr. 15.

projector of an Intelligence-office, to be
established in the Scottish capital, such as were already planted in
London, Paris, Amsterdam, and other large cities, for ‘recording the
names of servants, upon trial and certificate of their manners and
qualifications, whereby masters may be provided with honest
servants of all sorts, and servants may readily know what masters are
unprovided’—and ‘the better and more easy discovery of all bargains,
and the communication and publishing all proposals and other
businesses that the persons concerned may think fit to give notice
and account of, for the information of all lieges.’
He had been at pains to learn how such offices were conducted in
foreign countries, and had already set up a kind of register-office for
servants in Edinburgh, ‘to the satisfaction and advantage of many, of
all ranks and degrees.’ There was, however, a generation called wed-
men and wed-wives, who had been accustomed, in an irregular way,
to get employers for servants and nurses, and servants and nurses for
masters and mistresses. It was evident to John that his intelligence-
office could never duly thrive unless these practitioners were wholly
suppressed. He craved exclusive privileges accordingly from the
Privy Council—that is, that these wed-men and wed-wives be
discharged ‘on any colour or pretence’ from meddling with the hire
of servants, or giving information about bargains and proposals—
though ‘without prejudice [he was so far modest] to all the lieges to
hire servants and enter into bargains, and do all other business upon
their own proper knowledge, or upon information gratuitously
given.’
Honest John seems to have felt that something was necessary to
reconcile the authorities to a plan obviously so much for his own
interest. The religious feeling was, as usual, a ready resource. He
reminded the Lords that there had been great inconveniences from
the dishonest and profligate servants 1701.
recommended by the wed-men and wed-
wives; nay, some had thus been intruded into families who had not
satisfied church-discipline, and did not produce testimonials from
ministers! He held out that he was to take care ‘that all such as offer
themselves to nurse children shall produce a certificate of their good
deportment, in case they be married, and if not, that they have
satisfied the kirk for their scandal, or have found a caution so to do.’
One great advantage to the public would be, that gentlemen or
ladies living in the country could, by correspondence with the office,
and no further trouble or expense, obtain servants of assured
character, ‘such as master-households, gentlemen, valets, stewards,
pages, grieves, gardeners, cooks, porters, coachmen, grooms,
footmen, postilions, young cooks for waiting on gentlemen, or for
change-houses; likewise gentlewomen for attending ladies,
housekeepers, chambermaids, women-stewards and cooks, women
for keeping children, ordinary servants for all sorts of work in private
families, also taverners and ticket-runners, with all sorts of nurses
who either come to gentlemen’s houses, or nurse children in their
own’—for so many and so various were the descriptions of menials
employed at that time even in poor Scotland.
With regard to the department for commercial intelligence, it was
evident that ‘men are often straitened how and where to inquire for
bargains they intend,’ while others are equally ‘at a loss how to make
known their offers of bargains and other proposals.’ The latter were
thus ‘obliged to send clapps, as they call them,[295] through the town,
and sometimes to put advertisements in gazettes, which yet are
noways sufficient for the end designed, for the clapps go only in
Edinburgh, and for small businesses, and the gazette is uncertain,
and gazettes come not to all men’s hands, nor are they oft to be found
when men have most to do with them, whereas a standing office
would abide all men, and be ever ready.’
The Council complied with Lawson’s petition in every particular,
only binding him to exact no more fee than fourteen shillings Scots
(1s. 2d.), where the fee is twelve pounds Scots (£1 sterling) or
upwards, and seven shillings Scots where the fee is below that sum.
 The infant library of the Faculty of July 3.
Advocates having been burnt out of its
original depository in the Parliament 1701.
Square, a new receptacle was sought for it
in the rooms under the Parliament House—the Faculty and the
Edinburgh magistrates concurring in the request—and the Privy
Council complied, only reserving the right of the high constable to
view and search the place ‘the time of the sitting of parliament’—a
regulation, doubtless, held necessary to prevent new examples of the
Gunpowder Treason.

Lord Basil Hamilton, sixth son of the Aug. 27.

Duchess of Hamilton—a young man
endeared to his country by the part he had taken in vindicating her
rights in the Darien affair—lost his life by a dismal accident, leaving
but one consolation to his friends, that he lost it in the cause of
humanity. Passing through Galloway, with his brother the Earl of
Selkirk and some friends, he came to a little water called the
Minnick, swelled with sudden rain. A servant went forward to try the
ford, and was carried away by the stream. Lord Basil rushed in to
save the man, caught him, but was that moment dismounted, and
carried off by the torrent; so he perished in the sight of his brother
and friends, none being able to render him any assistance. It was a
great stroke to the Hamilton family, to the country party, and indeed
to the whole of the people of Scotland. Lord Basil died in his thirtieth
year.
On the evening of the next day, the Earl of Selkirk came, worn with
travel, to the gate of Hamilton Palace, to tell his widowed mother of
her irreparable loss. But, according to a story related by Wodrow, her
Grace was already aware of what had happened. ‘On the
Wednesday’s night [the night of the accident] the duchess dreamed
she saw Lord Basil and Lord Selkirk drowned in a water, and she
thought she said to Lady Baldoon [Lord Basil’s wife], “Charles and
Basil are drowned,” Charles being the Earl of Selkirk. The Lady
Baldoon, she thought, answered: “Lord Selkirk is safe, madam; there
is no matter.” The duchess thought she answered: “The woman’s
mad; she knows not her lord is dead;” and that she [Lady Baldoon]
added: “Is Basil dead? then let James [the duke] take all: I will
meddle no more with the world.” All this she [the duchess] told in
the Thursday morning, twelve hours or more before Lord Selkirk
came to Hamilton, who brought the first word of it.’[296]

Four men were tried at Perth for theft by Dec. 5.

the commissioners 1701.
for securing the
peace of the Highlands, and, being found guilty, were liable to the
punishment of death. The Lords, however, were pleased to adjudge
them to the lighter punishment of perpetual servitude, not in the
plantations, as we have seen to be common, but at home, and the
panels to be ‘at the court’s disposal.’ One of them, Alexander Steuart,
they bestowed as a gift on Sir John Areskine of Alva, probably with a
view to his being employed as a labourer in the silver-mine which Sir
John about this time worked in a glen of the Ochils belonging to him.
[297]
Sir John was enjoined to fit a metal collar upon the man, bearing
the following inscription: ‘Alexr. Steuart, found guilty of death for
theft, at Perth, the 5th of December 1701, and gifted by the justiciars
as a perpetual servant to Sir John Areskine of Alva;’ and to remove
him from prison in the course of the ensuing week.[298] The reality of
this strange proceeding has been brought home to us in a surprising
manner, for the collar, with this inscription, was many years ago
dredged up in the Firth of Forth, in the bosom of which it is surmised
that the poor man found a sad refuge from the pains of slavery. As a
curious memorial of past things, it is now preserved in our National
Museum of Antiquities.
The reader will perhaps be surprised to hear of a silver-mine in the
Ochils, and it may therefore be proper, before saying anything more,
that we hear what has been put on record on this subject.
‘In the parish of Alva, a very valuable mine of silver was discovered
about the commencement of the last century[299] by Sir James [John]
Erskine of Alva, in the glen or ravine which separates the Middle-hill
from the Wood-hill. It made its first appearance in small strings of
silver ore, which, being followed, led to a large mass of that metal. A
part of this had the appearance of malleable silver, and was found on
trial to be so rich as to produce twelve ounces of silver from fourteen
ounces of ore. Not more than £50 had been expended when this
valuable discovery was made. For the space of thirteen or fourteen
weeks, it is credibly affirmed that the proprietor obtained ore from
this mine to the value of £4000 per week. When this mass was
exhausted, the silver ore began to appear in smaller quantities;
symptoms of lead and other metals 1701.
presented themselves, and the search was
for the present abandoned.’[300]
It is related that Sir John, walking with a friend over his estate,
pointed out a great hole, and remarked: ‘Out of that hole I took fifty
thousand pounds.’ Then presently, walking on, he came to another
excavation, and, continued he: ‘I put it all into that hole.’
Nevertheless, the search was renewed by his younger brother,
Charles Areskine, Lord Justice-Clerk, but without the expected fruit,
though a discovery was made of cobalt, and considerable quantities
of that valuable mineral were extracted even from the rubbish of his
predecessor’s works. In 1767, Lord Alva, the son of the Lord Justice-
Clerk, bestowed a pair of silver communion-cups upon the parish of
Alva, with an inscription denoting that they were fashioned from
silver found at the place.
The granting of Steuart as ‘a perpetual servant’ to Sir John
Areskine sounds strangely to modern ears; but it was in perfect
accordance with law and usage in Scotland in old times; and there
was even some vestige of the usage familiar to Englishmen at no
remote date, in laws for setting the poor to work in workhouses. The
act of the Highland justiciars was the more natural, simple, and
reasonable, that labourers in mines and at salt-works were regarded
by the law of Scotland as ‘necessary servants,’ who, without any
paction, by merely coming and taking work in such places, became
bound to servitude for life, their children also becoming bound if
their fathers in any way used them as assistants. Such is the view of
the matter coolly set down in the Institutes of Mr John Erskine
(1754), who further takes leave to tell his readers that ‘there appears
nothing repugnant, either to reason, or to the peculiar doctrines of
Christianity, in a contract by which one binds himself to perpetual
service under a master, who, on his part, is obliged to maintain the
other in all the necessaries of life.’ It appears that the salters and
miners were transferred with the works when these were sold; but a
right in the masters to dispose of the men otherwise, does not appear
to have been a part of the Scots law.
 In the year 1743, there appears to have been a disposition among
the bondsmen of the coal-mines in Fife and Lothian to assert their
freedom. Fifteen men who worked in the Gilmerton coal-works
having absented themselves in October, and gone to work at other
collieries, their master, Sir John Baird of 1701.
Newbyth, advertised them, so that no other
master might break the act of parliament by entertaining them, and
also that the deserters might be secured. In the same year, the
Marquis of Lothian had to complain of three boys who ran away from
his colliery at Newbattle, and took refuge amongst the people of
another estate, supposed to have been that of the Viscount Oxenford.
He accordingly addressed the following letter to that nobleman:
‘Newbattle, July the 21st, 1743.

‘My Lord—Being told Sir Robert Dixon is not at home, I am equally satisfied
that Mr Biger should determine the use and practice of coal-masters in such cases,
if he pleases to take the trouble, which I suppose is all your lordship is desirous to
know before you let me have these boys that ran away from my colliery, and was
entertained by your people; but if I mistake your intention, and you think it
necessary I prove my title to them in law, I am most willing to refer the whole to
Mr Biger, and therefore am ready to produce my evidence at any time you please to
appoint, and if my claim is found to be good, shall expect the boys be returned
without my being obliged to find them out. My lord, I am not so well acquainted
with Mr Biger as to ask the favour; therefore hopes your lordship will do it, and
wish it may be determined soon, if convenient. I beg my best respects to Lady
Orbiston; and am, my lord,

‘Your lordship’s most obedient

‘and humble Servant,
‘Lothian.’

‘P. S.—I have not the smallest pretensions to the faither of these boys, and
should have pleasure in assisting you if I could spare any of my coaliers.’[301]
Whether Mr Gibson of Durie had been dealt with in the same
manner by his colliers, we do not know; but in November he
advertised for hands, offering good and regularly paid wages, and ‘a
line under his hand, obliging himself to let them go from the works at
any time, upon a week’s warning, without any restraint whatever.’ He
would also accept a loan of workers from other coal-proprietors, and
oblige himself ‘to restore them when demanded.’[302]
 I must not, however, forget—and certainly it is a curious thing to
remember—that I have myself seen in early 1701.
life native inhabitants of Scotland who had
been slaves in their youth. The restraints upon the personal freedom
of salters and colliers—remains of the villainage of the middle ages—
were not put an end to till 1775, when a statute (15 Geo. III. 28)
extinguished them. I am tempted to relate a trivial anecdote of actual
life, which brings the recentness of slavery in Scotland vividly before
us.
About the year 1820, Mr Robert Bald of Alloa, mining-engineer,
being on a visit to Mr Colin Dunlop, at the Clyde Ironworks, near
Glasgow, found among the servants of the house an old working-
man, commonly called Moss Nook, who seemed to be on easy terms
with his master. One day, Mr Bald heard the following conversation
take place between Mr Dunlop and this veteran:
‘Moss Nook, you don’t appear, from your style of speaking, to be of
this part of the country. Where did you originally come from?’
‘Oh, sir,’ answered Moss Nook, ‘do you not know that your father
brought me here long ago from Mr M‘Nair’s of the Green [a place
some miles off, on the other side of the river]? Your father used to
have merry-meetings with Mr M‘Nair, and, one day, he saw me, and
took a liking to me. At the same time, Mr M‘Nair had taken a fancy to
a very nice pony belonging to your father; so they agreed on the
subject, and I was niffered away for the pony. That’s the way I came
here.’
The man had, in short, been a slave, and was exchanged for a
pony. To Mr Bald’s perception, he had not the least idea that there
was anything singular or calling for remark in the manner of his
leaving the Green.

A Scottish clergyman resident in England 1702.

—the same who lately ‘promoted
contributions for the printing of Bibles in the Irish language, and
sent so many of them down to Scotland, and there is no news he
more earnestly desires to know than what the G[eneral] A[ssembly]
doth whenever it meeteth for promoting the interests of the Gospel
in the Highlands’—at this time started a scheme for ‘erecting a
library in every presbytery, or at least county, in the Highlands.’ He
had been for some time prevented from maturing his plan by bodily
distempers and faint hopes of success; but now the scheme for
sending libraries to the colonies had encouraged him to come
forward, and he issued a printed paper 1702.
explaining his views, and calling for
assistance. His great object was to help the Highland Protestant
clergy in the matter of books, seeing that, owing to their poverty, and
the scarcity of books, few of them possessed property of that kind to
the value of twenty shillings; while it was equally true, that at the
distance they lived at from towns, the borrowing of books was with
most of them impossible. It was the more necessary that they should
be provided with books, that the Romish missionaries were so active
among the people: how could the clergy encounter these adversaries
without the knowledge which they might derive from books? ‘The
gross ignorance of the people in those parts, together with some late
endeavours to seduce the inhabitants of the isle of Hirta to a state of
heathenism,[303] make it very necessary that they be provided with
such treatises as prove the truth of the Christian religion. At the
same time, the excellent parts and capacities of the ministers
generally throughout the Highlands give good ground to expect
much fruit from such a charity.’
The promoter of the scheme felt no hesitation in asking assistance
in the south, because the poverty of Scotland—‘occasioned chiefly by
their great losses at sea, the decay of trade, the great dearth of corn,
and the death of cattle for some years together—renders the people
generally unable to do much in the way of charity. Nevertheless,
there are not wanting those amongst them, who, amidst their straits
and wants, are forward to promote this or any other good design,
even beyond their power.’ He hoped no native would take offence at
this confession, the truth of which ‘is too much felt at home and
known abroad to be denied.... But if any are so foolish as to censure
this paragraph, their best way of confutation is to take an effectual
and speedy course to provide a competent number of libraries for
such parts of our native country as need them most.’
He even went so far as to draw up a set of rules for the keeping and
lending of the books—a very stringent code certainly it is; ‘but,’ says
he, ‘they who know the world but a little, and have seen the fate of
some libraries, will reckon the outmost precaution we can use little
enough to prevent what otherwise will be unavoidable. It’s a work of
no small difficulty to purchase a parcel of good books for public
advantage; nor is it less difficult to preserve 1702.
and secure them for posterity, when they
are purchased.’[304]
A Memorial concerning the Highlands, published at Edinburgh in
the ensuing year, described them as full of ignorance and
heathenism. Most of the people were said to be unacquainted with
the first principles of Christianity; a few had been ‘caught by the
trinkets of popery.’ While there were schools at Inverness, Forres,
Keith, Kincardine O’Neil, Perth, &c.—places closely adjacent to the
Highlands—there were none in the country itself, excepting one at
Abertarf (near the present Fort-Augustus, in Inverness-shire), which
had been erected by charitable subscription, but where it was found
nearly impossible to get scholars unless subsistence was provided for
them. In remote places, children remained unbaptised for years. In
the country generally, theft and robbery were esteemed as ‘only a
hunting, and not a crime;’ revenge, in matters affecting a clan, even
when carried the length of murder, was counted a gallantry; idleness
was a piece of honour; and blind obedience to chiefs obscured all
feeling of subjection to civil government.[305]
It was under a sense of the unenlightened state of the Highlands,
and particularly of the hold which the Catholic religion had obtained
over the Gael, that the ‘Society for the Propagation of Christian
Knowledge’ was soon after formed by a combination of the friends of
Presbyterian orthodoxy. It was incorporated in 1709, at which time a
strong effort was made by the courts of the Established Church to
promote contributions in its behalf, though under some considerable
discouragements. Wodrow tells us that this Society was originated by
a small knot of gentlemen, including Mr Dundas of Philipston, clerk
of the General Assembly; Sir H. Cunningham, Sir Francis Grant
[Lord Cullen], Commissary Brodie, Sir Francis Pringle, and Mr
George Meldrum, who, about 1698, had formed themselves into a
society for prayer and religious correspondence. Writing now to Mr
Dundas about the subscriptions, and enclosing twenty-five pounds as
a contribution from the presbytery of Paisley, he apologises for the
smallness of the sum in proportion to the importance of the object,
and says: ‘The public spirit and zeal for any good designs is much
away from the generality here.’ ‘The truth is,’ says he, regarding
another matter, ‘the strait of this part of the 1702.
country is so great, through the dearth of
victual, that our collections are very far from maintaining our poor,
and our people ... are in such a pet with collections for bridges,
tolbooths, &c., that when any collection is intimate, they are sure to
give less that day than their ordinary.’[306] Nevertheless, the Society
was able to enter on a course of activity, which has never since been
allowed to relax.
The scheme of presbyterial libraries was realised in 1705 and 1706
to the extent of nineteen, in addition to which fifty-eight local
libraries were established; but these institutions are understood to
have been little successful and ill supported. In 1719, the Christian
Knowledge Society had forty-eight schools established, increased to a
hundred and nine in 1732, and to two hundred at the close of the
century. Its missionary efforts were also very considerable. Such,
however, were the natural and other difficulties of the case, that a
writer described the people in 1826 as still ‘sunk in ignorance and
poverty.’[307] It is not merely that schools must necessarily be few in
proportion to geographical space, and school-learning, therefore,
difficult of attainment, but the Highlander unavoidably remains
unacquainted with many civilising influences which the
communication of thought, and observation of the processes of
merchandise and the mechanical trades, impart to more fortunate
communities. The usual consequence of the introduction of
Christianity to minds previously uneducated has been realised. It has
taken a form involving much of both old and new superstition, along
with feelings of intolerance towards dissent even in the most
unessential particulars, such as recall to men in the south a former
century of our history.
It is remarkable that, while the bulk of the Highland population
were unschooled and ignorant, there were abundance of gentlemen
who had a perfect knowledge of Latin, and even composed Latin
poetry. Nor is it less important or more than strictly just to observe
that, amidst all the rudeness of former times in the Highlands, there
was amongst the common people an old traditionary morality, which
included not a little that was entitled to admiration. To get a full idea
of what this was, one must peruse the writings of Mrs Grant and
Colonel Stewart. The very depredations so often spoken of could
hardly be said to involve a true turpitude, 1702.
being so much connected as they were with
national and clan feelings.

Captain Simon Fraser of Beaufort, who Feb. 10.

had long been declared rebel for not
appearing to answer at the Court of Justiciary on the charge of rape
brought against him by the dowager Lady Lovat,[308] was described at
this time as living openly in the country as a free liege, ‘to the
contempt of all authority and justice.’ The general account given of
his habits is rather picturesque. ‘He keeps in a manner his open
residence within the lordship of Lovat, where, and especially in
Stratherrick,[309] he further presumes to keep men in arms, attending
and guarding his person.’ These he also employed in levying
contributions from Lady Lovat’s tenants, and he had thus actually
raised between five and six thousand merks. ‘Proceeding yet to
further degrees of unparalleled boldness, [he] causes make public
intimation at the kirks within the bounds on the Lord’s Day, that all
the people be in readiness with their best arms when advertised.’ The
tenants were consequently so harassed as to be unable to pay her
ladyship any rents, and there were ‘daily complaints of these strange
and lawless disorders.’
The Council granted warrants of intercommuning against the
culprit, and enjoined his majesty’s forces to be helpful in
apprehending him.[310] We find that, in the month of August, Fraser
had departed from the country, but his interest continued to be
maintained by others. His brother John, with thirty or forty ‘loose
and broken men,’ went freely up and down the countries of Aird and
Stratherrick, menacing with death the chamberlains of the Lady
Lovat[311] and her husband, Mr Alexander Mackenzie of Prestonhall,
if they should uplift the rents in behalf of their master and mistress,
and threatening the tenants in like manner, if they should pay their
rents to those persons. The better to support this lawless system,
John kept a garrison of armed gillies in the town of Bewly, ‘the heart
of the country of Aird,’ entirely at the cost of the tenants there.
Within the last few weeks, they had taken from the tenants of Aird
‘two hundred custom wedders and lambs,’ and, breaking up the
meal-girnels of Bewly, they had supplied themselves with sixty bolls
of meal. At the beginning of July, Fraser, 1702.
younger of Buchrubbin, and two
accomplices, came to the house of Moniack, the residence of Mr
Hugh Fraser, one of the lady’s chamberlains, ‘and having by a false
token got him out of his house,’ first reproached him with his office,
and then ‘beat him with the butts of their guns, and had murdered
him if he had not made his escape.’
Mr Hugh Fraser and Captain John Mackenzie, ‘conjunct bailie and
chamberlain,’ applied for protection to the Highland commission of
justiciary, who ordered a small military party to go and maintain the
law in the Aird. But it was very difficult to obtain observance of law
in a country where the bulk of the people were otherwise minded.
The introduction of soldiers only added to the fierceness of the
rebellious Frasers, who now sent the most frightful threats to all who
should take part with Lady Lovat and her husband.
On the 5th of August, John Fraser came from Stratherrick with a
party of fifty armed followers, and gathering more as he passed
through the Aird, he fell upon the house of Fanellan, where Captain
Mackenzie and the ten soldiers were, with between two and three
hundred men, calling upon the inmates to surrender, on pain of
having the house burnt about their ears if they refused. They did
refuse to yield, and the Frasers accordingly set fire to the house and
offices, the whole of which were burnt to the ground. Captain
Mackenzie, Hugh Fraser of Eskadale, the ten soldiers and their
commander, Lieutenant Cameron, besides a servant of Prestonhall,
were all taken prisoners. Having dismissed the soldiers, the Frasers
carried the rest in a bravadoing triumph through the country till they
came to the end of Loch Ness. There dismissing Lieutenant
Cameron, they proceeded with the two bailies and the servant to
Stratherrick, everywhere using them in a barbarous manner. The
report given nine days after in Edinburgh says of the prisoners,
whether they be dead or alive is unknown.
The Privy Council, feeling this to be ‘such an unparalleled piece of
insolence as had not been heard of in the country for an age,’
instantly ordered large parties of troops to march into the Fraser
countries, and restore order.
 On the 8th of September, the Council sent Brigadier Maitland and
Major Hamilton their thanks ‘for their good services done in
dispersing the Frasers,’ and, a few days after, we find orders issued
for using all endeavours to capture John Fraser. Captain Grant’s
company remained in Stratherrick till the 1702.
[312]
ensuing February.

At ten o’clock in the evening, Colonel Mar. 11.

Archibald Row arrived express at
Edinburgh with the news of the king’s death. King William died in
Kensington Palace at eight o’clock in the morning of Sunday the 8th
instant: it consequently took three days and a half for this express to
reach the Scottish capital, being a day more than had been required
by Robert Carey, when he came to Edinburgh with the more welcome
intelligence of the demise of Queen Elizabeth, ninety-nine years
before.

House of Lord Advocate Steuart, at

bottom of Advocates’ Close, west side.
 REIGN OF QUEEN ANNE: 1702–1714.

The death of King William without children (March 8, 1702),

opened the succession to the Princess Anne, second daughter of the
late King James. Following up the policy of her predecessor, she had
not been more than two months upon the throne, when, in
conjunction with Germany and Holland, she proclaimed war against
the king of France, whose usurpation of the succession to Spain for a
member of his family, had renewed a general feeling of hostility
against him. This war, distinguished by the victories of the Duke of
Marlborough, lasted till the peace of Utrecht in 1713. The queen had
been many years married to Prince George of Denmark, and had had
several children; but all were now dead.
King William left the people of Scotland in a state of violent
discontent, on account chiefly of the usage they had received in the
affair of Darien. Ever since the Revolution, there had been a large
party, mainly composed of the upper classes, in favour of the exiled
dynasty. It was largely reinforced, and its views were generally much
promoted, by the odium into which the government of William III.
had fallen, and by the feelings of jealousy and wrath which had been
kindled against the whole English nation. This was not a natural
state of things for Scotland, for the bulk of the people, Presbyterian
at heart, could have no confidence in a restored sovereign of the
House of Stuart; but anger had temporarily overcome many of the
more permanent feelings of the people, and it was hard to say what
course they might take in the dynastic difficulties which were
impending.
In 1700, the English parliament, viewing the want of children to
both William and the Princess Anne, had settled the crown of
England upon the Electress Sophia of Hanover, daughter of the
Princess Elizabeth, daughter of King James I., she being the nearest
Protestant heir; thus excluding not only the progeny of James II., but
that of several elder children of the Princess Elizabeth, all of whom
were of the Roman Catholic religion. It was highly desirable that the
Scottish Estates should be induced to settle the crown of Scotland on
the same person, in order that peace might be preserved between the
two kingdoms; but the discontents of the Scotch stood in the way.
Not that there existed in Scotland any insuperable desire for another
person, or any special objection to Sophia; the great majority would
probably have voted, in ordinary circumstances, for this very course.
But Scotland had been wronged and insulted; it was necessary to
shew the English that this could not be done with safety to
themselves. She had a claim to equality of trading privileges: it was
right that she should use all fair means to get this established.
Accordingly, in 1703, the Scottish parliament passed two acts
calculated to excite no small alarm in the south: one of them, styled
the Act of Security, ordaining that the successor of Queen Anne
should not be the same person with the individual adopted by the
English parliament, unless there should be a free communication of
trade between the two countries, and the affairs of Scotland
thoroughly secured from English influence; the other, providing that,
as a means of enforcing the first, the nation should be put under
arms. The queen, after some hesitation, was obliged to ratify the Act
of Security. In the debates on these measures, the Scottish
parliament exhibited a degree of eloquence which was wholly a
novelty, and the memory of which long survived. It was a remarkable
crisis, in which a little nation, merely by the moral power which
animated it, contrived to inspire fear and respect in one much its
superior in numbers and every other material element of strength.
The general sense of danger thus created in England proved
sufficient to overcome that mercantile selfishness which had inflicted
so much injustice upon Scotland. It came to be seen, that the only
way to secure a harmony with the northern kingdom in some matters
essential to peace, was to admit it to an incorporating union, in
which there should be a provision for an equality of mercantile
privileges. To effect this arrangement, accordingly, became the policy
of the English Whig ministry of Queen Anne. On the other hand, the
proposition did not meet a favourable reception in Scotland, where
the ancient national independence was a matter of national pride;