were alleged to have taken place was suspended. Forbes regarded this as unjust. He was not called upon to prosecute. He even collected money to support the Scottish prisoners at Carlisle. He wrote an anonymous letter to Sir Robert Walpole, protesting against severity to the rebels (Culloden Papers, pp. 61–5). His sentiments exposed him to suspicion of Jacobite leanings.
In 1721–2 Forbes was M.P. for Ayr burgh. In 1722 he stood against Alexander Gordon of Ardoch for the Inverness burghs. Gordon was returned, but upon a petition Forbes was declared to be duly elected. He had already been frequently employed as counsel in appeals to the House of Lords, and he made acquaintance with many eminent statesmen, and, it is said, with Pope, Arbuthnot, and their circle (Scots Mag. lxiv. 539). He knew Thomson the poet, who apostrophises him in ‘Autumn,’ and patronised Ruddiman and other men of letters. On 29 May 1725 he was appointed lord advocate in succession to Robert Dundas of Arniston [q. v.], and is said to have distinguished himself by his humanity. His salary was only 500l. or 600l. a year, and he had to discharge many of the duties previously attached to the office of secretary of state for Scotland, which was suspended during the years 1725–1731, and finally abolished in 1746.
Forbes had to take active measures during the troubles which arose from the extension of the English system of taxation to Scotland. A riot took place at Glasgow in 1725, when Shawfield, the house of Daniel Campbell, M.P. for Glasgow, who had supported the malt tax, was sacked by the mob. Forbes at once accompanied a force, commanded by General Wade, which marched upon Glasgow. Forbes, as lord advocate, ordered the arrest of the Glasgow magistrates for their negligence, and brought them, with some of the rioters, to Edinburgh (Wodrow, Analecta, Maitland Club, iv. 215–17). They were liberated after a short time. The same act provoked a strike of the Edinburgh brewers, who had been ordered by the court of session to sell their ale at a fixed price. The court, at Forbes's request, ordered them to continue their trade, and threatened to commit them to prison. After a sharp dispute the brewers yielded, and Forbes received warm thanks from Walpole. He afterwards proposed very stringent regulations for the protection of the revenue. Forbes was a tenant of the infamous Francis Charteris [q. v.], at the old manor house of Stoneyhill, near Edinburgh. The anonymous biographer says that he defended Charteris, who died in 1732. In gratitude for this and for some other reasons Charteris left him 1,000l. and the life-rent of Stoneyhill (Burton, pp. 309, 310).
In 1735 Forbes succeeded to the family estates on the death of his brother, and undertook agricultural improvements at Bunchrew, a small property near Culloden. In 1737 he took a conspicuous part in opposing the bill inflicting penalties upon the city of Edinburgh for the Porteous affair. He made two firm, though temperate, speeches, reported in the ‘Parliamentary History’ (x. 248, 282), on 16 May and 9 June. The Duke of Argyll and all the Scottish members took the same side, and the bill was reduced to a measure ‘for making the fortune of an old cook-maid’ (Mrs. Porteous), and even then carried by a casting vote. Though Forbes had thus opposed government while holding an official position, he was immediately appointed lord president of the court of session, and took his seat 21 June 1737. He soon gained a very high character as a judge (Culloden Papers; Edinb. Rev. xxvi. 108; Lord Cockburn). Many of the cases which he decided are given in Kilkerran's reports. He immediately made regulations for improving the despatch of business, and reported in February 1740 that all arrears had been cleared off (Burton, p. 361). He enforced respect for his office upon all classes, and at the same time laboured at other incidental tasks. He made an elaborate investigation, at the request of the House of Lords, into the origin and history of Scottish peerages. He tried hard to convert various friends to a favourite crotchet. He held that the commercial prosperity of the country, otherwise in a satisfactory state, was threatened by the ‘excessive use of tea.’ He proposed to limit the use of tea by all persons with an income under 50l. a year. But memorials to the solicitor-general, Murray (afterwards Lord Mansfield), and other eminent persons met no response.
The approach of the rebellion of 1745 brought more serious difficulties. Forbes strongly, but vainly, urged preventive measures, and especially the plan, afterwards adopted by Chatham, of the formation of highland regiments (Burton, p. 368). In August 1745 he went to Inverness and corresponded with many of the highland leaders, especially Lovat, who had been known to his father, intimate with his brother John, and had kept up a friendly correspondence with Duncan Forbes since 1715 (ib. p. 119). Forbes had assisted Lovat in some of his complex lawsuits (ib. pp. 127, 128). Forbes now endeavoured to detach Lovat from the Pretender's cause. Lovat's clan made a sudden raid upon Culloden, which was fortified and garrisoned; but Lovat disavowed his com-
