In the early hours of Christmas morning 1950, four Scottish students from the University of Glasgow broke into Westminster Abbey and removed the Stone of Scone from the coronation chair.

The four conspirators – Ian Hamilton, Gavin Vernon, Kay Matheson and Alan Stuart – were members of the Scottish Covenant Association. This cross-party movement was founded in the 1940s by John MacCormick, formerly a central figure in the Scottish National Party (SNP). Its recent petition demanding home rule for Scotland, the Scottish Covenant, attracted two million signatures.

***

By late 1950, however, the cause of Scottish devolution had stalled; the covenant failed to yield a parliament for Scotland. In this context, MacCormick, rector of the University of Glasgow, helped plan the heist as an audacious assertion of Scotland’s ancient rights.

Hamilton later said: “I believed there was a chance of waking the people of Scotland up.”

The Stone of Scone, also known as the Stone of Destiny, was the stone upon which Scottish monarchs had been crowned. According to legend, the stone possesses a longer lineage – as the pillow used by the biblical patriarch Jacob when he dreamt of a ladder to heaven. Genesis 28:10-19 describes Jacob falling asleep on “one of the stones of the place” before setting it up as a pillar to mark the founding of Bethel.

In 1296, during the First War of Scottish Independence, King Edward I of England removed the stone from Scone Abbey. He transported the red sandstone block – a symbolic spoil of war – to Westminster, where it was fitted into the base of a specially commissioned carved-oak chair. King Edward’s Chair, with its spacious foundation, is still used at Westminster Abbey for the coronation of British monarchs.

Edward, also known as the Hammer of the Scots, had stripped Scotland of a symbol of its independence. It is said that the Treaty of Northampton (1328) was ratified with a promise to return the stone, but rioting London crowds prevented its removal. This terms of the treaty have been debated, however.

Over 600 years later, in July 1924, a bill was introduced by Red Clydesider MP David Kirkwood to return the stone to Scotland. Kirkwood described the stone as a “symbol of our nationhood”.

He declared: “Edward thought at that time, 1290, that he had completely conquered Scotland, that he had hammered the nationhood out of our country.

“He never did. I stand here today representing an unconquered race!”

He anticipated the objection that a socialist MP should be concerned with economics rather than ancient relics, declaring: “When we seek bread and shelter for our people, we also demand roses.”

The bill received its first reading by 201 votes to 171, but did not progress further.

***

In December 1950, Hamilton, Vernon, Matheson and Stuart drove from Glasgow to London in two Ford Anglias. The journey took a reported 18 hours.

At approximately 4:00 am on 25 December, the three men entered Westminster Abbey via a works yard near Poet’s Corner. They pried the 336 lb (152 kg) sandstone block from the cavity beneath the King Edward’s Chair; during the extraction, however, the ancient stone split into two pieces. It was later established that the stone had been damaged by a Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) bomb, loaded with metal bolts and nuts, which exploded next to the coronation chair in June 1914.

Hamilton, improvising, dragged the smaller fragment to one of the waiting cars. When a policeman approached the vehicle, Hamilton and Matheson pretended to kiss. The officer, unaware that a piece of the coronation regalia was covered by a coat in the back seat, shared a cigarette with them. He then told them to move on.

Hamilton returned to Westminster Abbey to retrieve the larger section, dragging it to the second car by using his coat as a sled.

The authorities soon discovered the coronation’s chair’s vacant chamber; roadblocks were erected and a nationwide search begun. The border between Scotland and England was closed by police – for the first time in 400 years. The Dean of Westminster, Alan Don, described the theft as a “senseless crime” by “sacrilegious hands”.

He vowed: “I will go to the ends of the Earth to fetch it back.”

Clip.

The first clue that the stone was retrieved by Scottish nationalists lay in the discovery of the initials “JFS”, newly inscribed on the coronation chair. JFS was believed to stand for “Justice for Scotland”.

The Scottish Covenant Association, however, denied involvement.

The students buried the larger piece in a field in Kent and hid the smaller piece in a garage in the Midlands. Eventually, both sections were transported to Scotland. The stone was repaired by Robert Gray, a nationalist politician and a Glasgow stonemason, who inserted a brass rod to join the two sections. The rod also contained a secret note.

The typewritten message, signed by John MacCormick, Gray and fellow stonemason Manley, was later reported to read:

“March, 1951. Stone of Destiny. This stone belongs to Scotland and it was stolen by Edward the First of England in 1296. The Church of England should be ashamed to admit that they have allowed this stolen piece of property to remain in Westminster Abbey from that time. It must be returned to Scotland and no doubt it will be demanded for the reopening of the Scottish Parliament which was never closed but only adjourned in 1707.”

The stone remained missing for four months until 11 April 1951, when the students left the stone on the high altar of Arbroath Abbey – the site where the Declaration of Arbroath was issued in 1320.

Two unsigned letters were placed on top of the stone, including one addressed to King George VI.

The letter addressed to George VI stated that those who seized the stone had “intended no indignity or injury”. It said that they had been inspired by “by their desire to compel the attention of His Majesty’s minister to the widely expressed demand of Scottish people for a measure of self-government.”

Clip.

***

Following a police investigation, the four students were identified and interviewed. However, the attorney general, Hartley Shawcross, decided against prosecution. Addressing the House of Commons on 19 April, Shawcross said that prosecuting would not be in the “public interest”.

He said: “The clandestine removal of the stone from Westminster Abbey, the manner of its taking and the manifest disregard for the sanctity of the Abbey were vulgar acts of vandalism which have caused great distress and offence both in England and Scotland and have brought the individuals concerned in them into great disrepute.

“I do not think, however, that the public interest requires that I should direct criminal proceedings to be taken.”

The attorney general said he had “no desire to provide these individuals with the opportunity either of being regarded by their followers as martyrs if convicted, or as heroes if they are not convicted.”

Scottish Labour MP Emrys Hughes responded that “a lot of people in Scotland regard [the heist] as an attempt to recover stolen property”.

The House of Lords debated the stone and its future on 9 May 1951. Conservative peer Lord Brabazon, who traced the stone’s lineage back 4,000 years, and the Duke of Montrose, the first signatory to MacCormick’s Scottish Covenant, were among those who called for the stone’s return to Scotland.

Brabazon said that he did not wish to dwell on “the recent incident of theft and sacrilege.”

But he added: “But when people hold fanatical views their actions can be explained, if not forgiven, and I ask your lordships this question: if that stone had remained in Scotland, do you think there would have been a raid by English people to get it back to England?

“This is a sacred stone, and it interests us so little that not one bishop sits upon the episcopal benches while we talk about one of the most sacred parts of our coronation service.”

Lord Macdonald of Gwaenysgor, responding for the Attlee government, said that the matter was “receiving consideration”. He stressed that the “recent incident” would not affect any decision.

Clip.

The death of George VI in February 1952 set in motion plans for a new coronation.

On 26 February, the new prime minister, Winston Churchill, announced that the stone had been “restored to its traditional place”. Reports said the sandstone slab was secured with an “inch-thick chain”, while burglar alarms were installed in Westminster Abbey.

Churchill’s announcement was met with some resistance from MPs, however. Hector McNeil, the secretary of state for Scotland at the time of the 1950 heist, asked if the prime minister had “consulted representative opinion in Scotland”.

Churchill responded: “A great deal of Scottish opinion was consulted at the time, and I consider that we have acted in accordance with what is the wish of the great majority of the Scottish people.”

Unionist MP Alan Gomme-Duncan told the prime minister that there would be “profound disappointment” at the government’s decision.

He added: “Whereas unanimously we wish the stone to be used for the coronation, as it should be, we think that it should be kept in the capital – Edinburgh – during the time between coronations.”

On 3 March, Churchill was again pressed for details of the consultations the government had undertaken before deciding to return the stone to Westminster. Scottish Labour MP John Rankin accused the prime minister of “treating responsible Scottish opinion very shabbily indeed”.

Churchill said he would not reveal the details of his consultation: “No names, no pack drill.”

Emrys Hughes mockingly said that the Dean of Westminster was now “wondering whether, on the Day of Judgment, he will appear with the prime minister on a charge of accepting stolen property”.

On 11 March, the House of Lords once again considered the question of the stone. Viscount Elibank moved a motion calling for the return of the stone to Scotland after the coronation; he claimed his ancestor (Johan de Morreff) had been “double-crossed” by Edward I in 1296.

Elibank said the stone had been “looted treacherously” by the English king.

Responding for the government, the Earl of Home rejected the proposal. He argued that if Scottish feeling had been truly strong, the issue would have been raised during the Treaty of Union negotiations in 1707.

He told the House: “The atmosphere at that time was extremely propitious; the English were very anxious to come to an agreement with the Scots and to get their signatures to the Treaty; and, in fact, they agreed to all the amendments which the Scottish negotiators put forward.”

He said that the stone’s “sole significance” lay in its use in the coronation ceremony.

A second attempt to secure the Stone of Scone was foiled in September 1974 after an automatic burglar alarm was triggered at Scotland Yard.

***

On 3 July 1996, John Major told the House of Commons that the Stone of Scone would be returned to Scotland. Addressing MPs, he acknowledged the “700th anniversary of its removal”, saying now was the time to “return it to its historic homeland”.

He maintained that the stone “remains the property of the crown.”

The prime minister added: “I wish to inform the House that, on the advice of Her Majesty’s ministers, the queen has agreed that the stone should be returned to Scotland.

“The stone will, of course, be taken to Westminster Abbey to play its traditional role in the coronation ceremonies of future sovereigns of the United Kingdom.”

Tony Blair, the Labour leader of the opposition, said that the return of the stone was a “welcome recognition of how we can celebrate the unity of the United Kingdom while being distinct and proud nations with differing traditions, histories and cultures.”

David Steel, the former Liberal Party leader and co-chair of the Scottish Constitutional Convention (SCC), argued that it was “the settled view of the majority of people in Scotland that they want not just the symbol, but the substance – the substance of the return of democratic control over our internal affairs in Scotland.”

SNP MP Margaret Ewing sought to remind the prime minister that the stone “is not the symbol of kingship but the symbol of the sovereignty of the people of Scotland, which is enunciated through the Declaration of Arbroath.”

Some Labour MPs were less enthusiastic. John Maxton, nephew of Red Clydesider and prominent Scottish home ruler James Maxton, dismissed Major’s announcement. Maxton called for the establishment of a Scottish parliament; he did not believe “that the return of a feudal, mediaeval symbol of tyranny is any more than a total irrelevance”.

Major’s announcement precipitated some lively debates over where the stone would be situated upon its return. Bill Walker, the Conservative MP for North Tayside, told the commons: “Scone is in my constituency and will remain in my constituency”. In a debate on 16 July, he refused to give way to SNP MP for Perth and Kinross Roseanna Cunningham.

Alex Salmond, the SNP MP for Banff and Buchan, objected to Walker’s tactics. Having interjected via a point of order, he was forced to withdraw the unparliamentary word “Balls”.

On 24 July, Michael Neubert, a self-proclaimed “Sassenach from well south of the border”, expressed his “scepticism” at the prime minister’s attempt to “rearrange hundreds of years of history by such a gesture”. He dismissed claims that ministers were honouring the 1328 Treaty of Northampton, describing the supposed obligation to return the stone as a historical fiction.

Neubert referred to the stone’s “religious associations” and, fearing it would become a tourist attraction, warned against its “desecration”.

The stone was installed in Edinburgh Castle on St Andrew’s Day 1996. Kay Matheson, 67, who was in attendance at the ceremony, said: “It was all worth it. If we hadn’t done it we would not be here today.”

In June 2008, Salmond – now the first minister of Scotland – said that he believed the Stone of Destiny to be a fake. He referred back to Edward I’s seizure of it in 1296.

He said: “If you’re the abbot of Scone and the strongest and most ruthless king in Christendom is charging toward you in 1296 to steal Scotland’s most sacred object and probably put you and half of your cohorts to death, do you do nothing and wait until he arrives or do you hide yourself and the stone somewhere convenient in the Perthshire hillside?

“I think the second myself.”

He also argued that Robert the Bruce would have demanded the stone’s return had he believed it to be the real deal. “One explanation is that he knew it wasn’t the right stone – and the right stone was lost, mislaid or out the way and he just thought this isn’t worth the bother”, Salmond said.

The stone was temporarily returned to London in May 2023 for the coronation of King Charles III. The arrangement, representing the stone’s first visit to London since 1996, was assented to by Humza Yousaf as first minister of Scotland.

Salmond criticised his successor for allowing the stone back to be sent back to Westminster.

Clip.

In January 2024, a previously lost fragment of the stone – gifted by Robert Gray to Neil MacCormick (son of John) – was discovered in a cupboard at the SNP’s headquarters. It had been given to Salmond, during his tenure as first minister of Scotland, in 2008. Neil MacCormick served as an SNP MEP from 1999 to 2004.

Lord (Michael) Forsyth of Drumlean, the secretary of state for Scotland under John Major, said he was astonished that Salmond had thought it appropriate to keep a gift “obtained as a result of a criminal act”.

The stone was moved from its display at Edinburgh Castle to its new permanent home at the Perth Museum in March 2024.

In November 2025, research led by the University of Stirling traced many surviving fragments of the stone, including pieces circulated after the 1950 heist. Gray was found to have numbered and curated 34 separate fragments. One travelled as far as Australia, where it was later housed in a museum, where it had been housed in a museum.

Several SNP politicians were among those who owned fragments, including Winnie Ewing, who wore a locket containing a chip when interviewed by David Frost in 1967 – the year of her stunning victory in the Hamilton by-election.