i'PCS^^ "¦

• ^Ti^

1 ¦«¦

SlIS'fORf
> ^
r^iif rtrK
ftffscoiur. Ciumotf AT %w
if
'- ^/9''/A
' ft
I give thefe^ Batki:
ferthefovMiag of a. College hi iji^tiiloiiyi

0

"Y^LU'^JMHYIEIESlIirY-

Gift of

IdO^

HISTORY

EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT KEITH.
IN THE DIOCESE OF MORA Y,
IN THE
17th, ISth, and 19th Centuries,
WITH OTHER
REMINISCENCES OF THE DIOCESES OF
MORAY AND ROSS.

Rev. JOHN ARCHIBALD, M.A.,
Incumbent of Trinity Church, Keith, and
Synod Clerk of Moray and Ross.

"Lo! I am with you alway."— Matt, xxviii. 20.

EDINBURGH :
ST. GILES' PRINTING CO., Johnston Terrace.
R. GRANT & SON, Princes Street.
Keith: JOHN MITCHELL.
1890.

H)ebication.

This little work is Dedicated, by permission,
TO THE
(Rtg^f (geSerenJi $ames (§. (g.. CKeffg. ©.©.,
Bishop of Moray, Ross, and Caithness,
the revered successor of
Guthrie and Falconar, of Jolly and Eden,
By his faithful Son in Christ,
THE AUTHOR.

NOTE.
My most sincere and special thanks are due to the
following friends who gave me much kind help in the
preparation of the Volume : —
The Rev. J. F. S. Gordon, D.D,, Glasgow.
The Rev. J. B. Craven, Kirkwall.
The Rev. George Sutherland, Portsoy, and
The Rev. George Boyes, Aberchirder.
I have also to thank the Rev. W. R. Pirie, and the
Kirk Session of the Established Church of Keith, for
their courtesy in giving me such ready access to the
books and documents in their possession.
The Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and
Ross are given along with the local history of the
Episcopal Church at Keith, when they are connected
with the same ; but when they are not so associated,
they are stated separately. The local history is given
mainly through the medium of short biographies of the
various clerics who have ofificiated at Keith during the
vicissitudes of the past three centuries.
JOHN ARCHIBALD.
Keith, March ^th, i8go.

CONTENTS.

I.— I. Keith,

Page
 9
2. The Spottiswoode Bishops, . . . lo
n.— The Episcopal Church at Keith in the Seven
teenth Century, . . . 13
III. — Seventeenth Century Reminiscences of the
Diocese of Moray, ...
The Laird of Brodie and the Bishops of
Moray,  47
IV. — The Episcopal Church at Keith in the Eigh
teenth Century, . . . . 52
V. — The Episcopal Church at Keith in the Nine
teenth Century,  gi
VI. — Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and
Ross, . . . . .
I. Consecration of Bishop Jolly,
2. Prince Charles Edward,
3. Bishop Jolly and the Vacancy in the See
of Ross in i8ig.
Index, 

CORRLGENDA.

139

142ISS

On page ig, delete Bishop " Alexander Forbes," and insert
Bishop "Alexander Douglas."
On page 91, for " Quebeck,'' read " Quebec."
On page 135, for " Rev. W. Skinner of Forfar," read " Rev.
John Skinner of Forfar.''
On pages 47-51, the headings should be, "Seventeenth
Century Reminiscences of the Diocese of Moray,"

^be Cburcb at Ikeitb
IN THE
SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.

Keith is a rising and prosperous town in the County of
Banff, being about twelve miles distant from the shores of
the Moray Firth. The town is built near the river Isla, which
flows into the Deveron. In the neighbourhood the scenery
is diversified by hill and vale, by woods and water. It is
said that the word " Keith" means " wind," and the place is
noted for its pure and healthy atmosphere. Behind one part
of the town rises the dark form of the Balloch Hill, and in
the opposite direction, the Hill of Muldary. In the distance,
Benrinnes, the Knock Hill, the Bin of Cullen, and other
elevations are discernible. Formerly, the town lay in the
hollow ground around the churchyard, but most of the houses
that were there have been demolished to make room for the
extension of the burial ground. The town consists of Keith
and Fife Keith, situated on different sides of the Isla.
The churchyard or cemetery is one of the most beautiful
spots in the vicinity. Close by, the river Isla flows beneath
two bridges, — one of ancient date, the other a later erection.
There is an old mill in the hollow which adds materially to
the picturesque appearance of the spot ; strangers, indeed,
not unfrequently pause to admire this well kept cemetery
and its interesting surroundings. Not far from the church
yard, within which only a fragment of the old church now
remains, is the present handsome Established Church, the
new Episcopal Church standing hard by.
In regard to its ecclesiastical position, the town of Keith is
situated in the an~cient Diocese of Moray ; but at the be
ginning of the seventeenth century, there was no consecrated
Bishop presiding over the See. B

IO The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
Before considering local details, it is necessary to give a
short account of the re-introduction of Episcopacy into
Scotland, at the beginning of the century, by means of the
Episcopal succession called "The Spottiswoode Succession
of Bishops."
"THE SPOTTISWOODE BISHOPS."
In 1603, James VI. of Scotland was crowned in Westminster,
as the successor of Elizabeth Tudor. Edward I. " Scotorum
malleus," 'i\&A carried off the " Stone of Destiny " from Scone,
and placed it within the Coronation Chair of England. The
external symbol of sovereignty was gone from their country, but
not so the spirit of the Scottish patriots. What Edward I. had
failed to do, and what his successors in their turn tried in vain
to accomplish with the aid of mighty armies, was at last, under
the providence of God, peacefully effected, and the lesser
country was welded to the greater, not by conquest, but by
the coronation of a descendant of The Bruce as King of Eng
land, upon the Scottish " Stone of Destiny," by the Archbishop
of Canterbury, within the sacred precincts that had witnessed
the inauguration of so many reigns.
England and Scotland were now united politically, but it
was to prove vastly more difificult to assimilate the civil and
ecclesiastical institutions of the two countries. More than a
century was to elapse before the English and the Scottish par
liaments were to meet as one legislative body at Westmin
ster, and repeated attempts to bring about ecclesiastical
unity between the two countries were fated to prove abortive.
It may be impossible to combine the principles of the
Church of Rome, and those of the Anglican Communion,
but why should it be so difficult to bring about a union be
tween the other Christian Communions of Northern and
Southern Britain. Harmful, indeed, it has been to the
spread of Christian faith, that religious differences, many
of them of but little moment, continue to keep apart
those who have already made common cause in separating
themselves from the errors of Rome. Truly unbelief, misery,
and sin, triumph by reason of our divisions. It cannot be
affirmed that the hoped for Re-union is impossible. Man
may fail, but God will accomplish in his own good time what
has hitherto seemed well nigh hopeless in the hands of man.
James was no sooner in possession of the English throne
than he determined to bring about ecclesiastical unity in his
dominions. This he thought would be secured if he could assi-

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 1 1
milate the systems of Church Government that obtained North
and South ofthe Border. Personally, he favoured Episcopacy
"as being more suitable to a monarchical form of government
in the state," and he very early took steps towards the restor
ation of Episcopal Government in Scotland. A few days
before his coronation at Westminster James nominated John
Spottiswoode to the Archiepiscopal See of Glasgow, vacant
as the King said in his letter of nomination, by the decease
of "James Beaton, late lawful Archbishop thereof" (See
Grub's Ecclesiastical History, vol. 1 1., page 283.) Spottiswoode,
the Royal nominee, was minister at Calder. George Glad-
stanes formerly appointed by the King Titular Bishop *
of Caithness, was now appointed Archbishop of St. Andrews,
and Alexander Forbes, minister of Fettercairn, was named
Bishop of Caithness.
Lastly in 1604 George Graham, minister at Scone, was
appointed Titular Bishop of Dunblane. These appointments
were made by the Crown without the slightest reference to
the clergy of the various districts included within the Dioceses
named, and without consulting the General Assembly which
met at Aberdeen in July, 1604, but was at once adjourned by
the King's command. A royal mandate forbade this adjourn
ed Assembly to meet, and on the day appointed by the
Assembly itself for convening, (July 2nd, 1605) only a small
number of ministers met at Aberdeen, where they elected
a Moderator and agreed to meet in the following September.
For this act of disobedience, John Forbes, minister of
Alford, and John Welsh, minister of Ayr, were indicted
before the Court of Justiciary on a charge of treason, found
guilty and sent to prison. These misdemeanants, like certain
of the clergy of the Church of England, in our own time, had
repudiated the interference of the civil power in things
spiritual. In this, lay their offence, and the harsh and unjust
sentence pronounced on them was not calculated to recom
mend the restored Episcopate in the eyes of the Scottish
nation. Too much was made of the civil appointment to a
Bishopric, and far too little of the spiritual character of that
Apostolic Office. To the Parliament held at Perth in July
1606 the "two Archbishops and the Bishops of Dunkeld and
Galloway, Ross and Dunblane, Murray and Caithness,
Orkney and the Isles," rode in great state as prelates of the
Church, while as a matter of fact at the time they were not
Bishops at all, not having received consecration. Another
* A Titular Bishop was the title giveo to a minister appointed to a vacant See,
but not yet consecrated.

12 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
general Assembly met at Glasgow which restored the Episco
pate and secured the civil rights of the titular Bishops. For
no less than seven years some of these men had been styled
Bishops without having been consecrated ; and without this,
the civil appointment was in itself of little value. On October
2ist, 1610, Spottiswoode, Archbishop of Glasgow ; Andrew
Lamb, Bishop of Brechin ; and Gavin Hamilton, Bishop of
Galloway were consecrated in the Chapel Royal by the
Bishops of London, Ely, Rochester and Worcester, the two'
Metropolitans not being allowed to assist, lest any claim
of jurisdiction might be set up by these prelates or
their successors over the Scottish Church. On their re
turn to Scotland the newly made Bishops consecrated George
Gladstanes Archbishop of St. Andrews, in the Primatial
city; and in March, 1611, Alexander Douglas was conse
crated Bishop of Moray. By the month of May, all the
Bishops of the province of St. Andrews had received con
secration. In this way the so-called Spottiswoode succession was-
duly established. At a meeting of the Bishops and some
of the leading ministers held at Edinburgh in February,.
1611, certain directions issued by. the King, in which it
was ordered that no minister should be admitted without
trial and imposition of hands by the Bishop and two or three
ministers called in by him to assist, were duly approved,*
Thus was Episcopacy re-introduced in Scotland, chiefly
by the authority of the State, and at a time when the nation
was about to enter upon a terrible struggle for civil and
religious liberty. Better far would it have been for the
Episcopal Church in this country had the new Bishops
crossed the Tweed with their spiritual commission only, but
with their Bibles and Prayer Books in their hands, and the-
love of souls in their hearts, rather than as they did; leaning
on the arm of the State. The Spottiswoode succession, how
ever unfortunate in its origin, has much to be proud of in its
history, including as it did both Bishops and clergy who
were bright and shining lights in their day and generation,
and who shed a lustre not only over Scotland but over
Christendom at large.
The establishment by James VI., immediately after his
accession to the English throne, of Titular Bishops in his
" auld realm," did little to recommend Episcopacy to the
Scottish people. The Titular prelates were secured in their
* See Grub's Ecclesiastical History, vol. ii, page 299. -

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 13
civil rights, but for no less than seven years, some of them,
not having received Consecration, were destitute of Apos
tolic authority. One of the Spottiswoode Bishops, Alex
ander Douglas, Bishop of Moray, and a son of the Provost
of Elgin, was minister of Keith in 1580.

We shall proceed to give the history of the Church at
Keith in the seventeenth century, through the medium of
brief biographical sketches of the clerics who held office in
the parish during the period.
Rev. Patrick Guthrie, .M.A., 1607.
Mr. Guthrie appears to have been a man of excellent
scholarship, for in 1608 he was promoted to be Sub-Principal
of King's College, Aberdeen. His orders were, in all proba
bility, non-Episcopal. They, at any rate, ante-dated the con
secration of the Spottiswoode Bishops.
Rev. John Ch.almers, 1610.
Before coming to Keith, Mr. Chalmers held the
second charge of Old St. Machar's, Aberdeen, and
was at the same time Sub-Principal of King's College,
having a reputation for an upright and pious life, and
esteemed by all who knew him. In 1610 he was ad
mitted to the ministry of the Church at Keith. His brief
pastorate ended in a sad and tragic manner. He had fallen
into a state of morbid melancholy, and on the 4th of June
i6il he laid violent hands on himself When found, he was
already scarce able to speak from weakness and loss of
blood. To the Marquis of Huntly he confessed that the
chief cause of his fall was the love of the world and
things worldly. From his death-bed he exhorted the mem
bers of the Presbytery, " to be diligent in their vocation,
to beware of hypocrisy, to cast away great care of the
world, and to strive against ambition." At that time
the piety and godly conversation of Mr. Patrick Forbes of
Corse was well known all over the North of Scotland. Mr.
Forbes called upon and conversed with the dying man,
who derived much consolation therefrom, remarking that
that journey was the best that the laird of Corse ever
made, adding with regard to himself, that Mr. Forbes
'' had done more good by his death, than ever he
would have done by his life." Previous to Mr. Forbes'
visit, Mr. Chalmers had expressed a wish that Mr.
Leonard Lesley, Pastor of Rothes, should accept the

14 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
char°-e of Keith, but afterwards he expressed a wish
that'the laird of Corse should be his successor. Patrick
Forbes of Corse came first to Keith to bring comfort
to a dying man who had sinned so grievously, and he had
the satisfaction of knowing that through him, the erring
brother was brought to the feet of Jesus, clothed and
in his right mind.
The people of Keith and the neighbouring clergy, earnestly
linked their entreaties to those of the Rev. Mr. Chalmers that
Mr. Forbes should become minister of Keith. The Laird of
Corse regarding the request as truly a call from the Lord, be
came the first Episcopal Incumbent of Keith in the 17th
century. Rev. Patrick Forbes, D.D., 1612.
Mr. Forbes was the eldest of the seven sons of Mr. William
Forbes of Corse and Elizabeth Strachan his wife. Young
Patrick Forbes showing signs of future scholarly distinction,
was educated with great care. Sent as a pupil to the distant
grammar school of Stirling, he was placed under the charge
of Thomas Buchanan, the grandson of the poet and historian.
On leaving Stirling, the future Bishop went to the University
of Glasgow, where he studied philosophy under the learned
Andrew Melville, who was a relation ofhis own family. In 1850,
Melville became Professor of Theology in the University of
St. Andrews to which University he was followed by young
Forbes, who soon became an excellent scholar in Theology
and the Hebrew language. Having left St. Andrews, Patrick
Forbes went to England and studied at Oxford, though his
name has not been fotmd in any of the matriculation lists of
the day. Returning to Scotland the young heir of Corse
was married to Lucretia Spens, daughter of David Spens,
the LairdofWormistoninFifeshire. In isg8 William Forbes
of Corse died and his son Patrick succeeded to the estate
and with his family went to reside at his paternal home in
Aberdeenshire. *
Patrick Blackburn, the titular Bishop of Aberdeen, earnestly
requested Patrick Forbes to take orders and become pastor
* It may here be mentioned that there were several inter-marriages between
the families of Forbes and Strachan of Thornton, and Sir James Strachan,
the third Baronet, erected a monument in the family aisle or chapel at Mary-
kirk, to the memory of his deceased wife, Elizabeth Forbe.'^, who dieil on January
loth, 1661. The Latin inscription on this monument is very much the same as
that now seen on a monument in the Keith Churchyard, and which was erected
by the Rev. Sir James Strachan to the memory of his wife, Katherine Rose, who
died on April 6th, 1689.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 15
of the district around Corse, which was then in a state of
spiritual destitution. Forbes declined this and other solicita
tions of a similar kind, and he was therefore ordered by the
Primate of Scotland to discontinue his public teaching till
he should be regularly ordained. The tragic occurrence at
Keith above mentioned, caused Mr. Forbes to change his
mind, and in 1612 he was ordained a minister of the Epis
copal Chiych of Scotland at the age of 47 years. After his
ordination Mr. Forbes resided at Keith.
We are told little about the details of Mr. Forbes' ministry
at Keith ; but there can be no doubt that the labours of such
a learned and pious pastor were felt to be a blessing by the
whole neighbourhood of Keith. His ability was so great that
in 1615, when Bishop Blackburn of Aberdeen died, there arose
a general desire in the Aberdeen Diocese that the laird of
Corse should be appointed as his successor. Though the
Primate concurred in these wishes, the King appointed
Alexander Forbes, Bishop of Caithness, to the vacancy.
While Episcopal minister at Keith, Mr. Forbes continued
his studies in Theology. He wrote a Commentary upon the
Apocalypse which was published in 1612, the year
in which he entered into Holy Orders and came to reside in
Strathisla, The Commentary was dedicated to James VI.
The adherents of the Roman Communion being then very
numerous in the district around Keith, most of the
writings of Forbes at this time related to our controversies with
Rome. The following words describe an addition made by
Mr. Forbes to the Commentary, — "Whereunto is added
a Profitable Treatise of the Author, in defence of the lawful
Calling of the Ministers of Reformed Churches, against the
Cavillations of Romanists."
In January 1618 the See of Aberdeen being again vacant.
King James wrote a letter to the Scottish Archbishops and
Bishops, signifying his wish that Patrick Forbes should be
appointed Bishop of Aberdeen on account of his "learning,
gravity, wisdom and true Godliness." The Scottish Prelates,
including Alexander Douglas, Bishop of Moray, the Diocese
in which Keith was situated, wrote to Forbes pressing the
offer upon him. Writing from Keith on February i6th, 1618,
Forbes told the Primate his wish to remain where he was —
" So as your Lordship shall very much oblige me unto you, if
with his Majesty's favour, and your Lordship's good contentment
I may be permitted to maintain a private ministry, carrying with it
no more difficulty but to answer well for my own personal

i6 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
carriage, and not to undergo the necessity of not only being myself
an actor, but either an urger and adactor also of my brethren to the
things which shall be against their mind, and perhaps against my
own light also, or then to incur dangerous indignation."
The chapter and clergy of the Synod of Aberdeen adding
their solicitations to those of the King, Forbes at length sub
mitted, and he was consecrated Bishop of Aberdeen at St.
Andrews, on the 17th of May, 1618, by Archbishop Spottis
woode, and the Bishops of Dunkeld and Brechin.
Even Wodrow, the opponent of Episcopacy, speaks very
highly about the character of Bishop Patrick Forbes. He
says of him : "This learned gentleman is taken notice of by
foreigners, though his learned son (Dr. John Forbes), whose
life may come afterward in its own place, is yet more famous
by his many and justly valued writings." On the 25th of
August, 1618, Bishop Forbes preached in St. John's Church,
Perth, before the General Assembly which met there.
Patrick Forbes was an excellent Bishop. Once every
summer at least he visited all the parish churches of his
Diocese, generally arriving, without any attendance, on the
Saturday evening, and appearing in the parish church with
out notice on the Sunday morning, where he carefully
observed how the services were performed, and how religious
instruction was imparted. For his Cathedral church at
Aberdeen he was successful in procuring most learned and
able men, so that "the Aberdeen Doctors," as they were
called, were famous for piety and learning, not only at home,
but over the whole Continent of Europe.
The Bishop was a great benefactor of the University of
Aberdeen, as the following words taken from the biographi
cal memoir of this Prelate in the publication of the Spottis
woode Society, clearly testify : — " Forbes, on his promotion
to the See, found everything connected with this University
in a very neglected state,— the buildings hastening lo decay
and ruin, the rents and income of the College dilapidated,
the statutes neglected, several ofthe Professorships altogether
fallen into disuse, the Professors careless in the performance
of their duties, and the whole liberal arts and sciences, for
the promotion of which Bishop Elphinstone had so zealously
laboured, almost unknown, and expired. The Bishop, with
great prudence and discretion, proceeded to remedy these
abuses, and to restore the University to its former honour
and dignity. He recovered and enlarged the revenues, he
repaired the magnificent buildings left by Elphinstone, he
restored the professorships which had been allowed to fall

77/1? Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 1 7
into decay, he caused the old and admirable statutes of the
Founder to be enforced, and by his own example and
authority, the Professors were reminded of, and urged to the
performance of their duties."
It was in 1632 that the Bishop received an unmistake-
able warning from the great Lord of the Vineyard, that
the labourer's task was well nigh done. In that year he was
struck with paralysis. Though deprived ofthe use of his limbs
he still continued to preach and to preside over the assem
blies of his Clergy. At length, on the morning of Easter
Eve (March 28th), 1635, Bishop Patrick Forbes expired in
the Episcopal Palace of old Aberdeen. Great, indeed, was
the work this pious man accomplished for his Church, for his
country, and for learning during the twenty-three years that
elapsed between his ordination as the Episcopal Incum
bent of Keith in 1612, and his decease.
The end was in accordance with his previous life. After
receiving the Holy Communion in company with six of the
Presbyters of his Diocese, and having been asked if he fully
tasted the life-giving sweetness of the Bread of Life, he
replied that he could now say with the aged Simeon,
" Lord, now lettest thou Thy servant depart in peace accord-
to Thy word, for mine eyes have seen Thy Salvation." At
that death-bed all thought of earhtly things was laid aside ;
the vanity of this world and the shortness of life were con
trasted with the enduring spiritual delight of righteousness
and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. The themes
of conversation were such as referred to the death
of the body and the immortality of the soul ; the last
thoughts of the dying Prelate related to the resurrection of
the body, the home eternal in the heavens, and the beatific
vision. Thus peacefully on that Easter Eve there passed
away one of the champions of the Faith. The glory
shed upon the closing scene of such a truly Apostolic
life will never pass away —
" Say not it dies, that glory,
'Tis caught unquenched on high.
Those saint-like brows so hoary
Shall wear it in the sky.
No smile is like the smile of death.
When all good musings past
Rise wafted with the parting breath.
The sweetest thought the last."
Keble^s Christian Year.
The body of the Bishop, after lying in state in St. Ninian's

1 8 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
Chapel, Aberdeen, was interred in St. Machar's Cathedral,
Old Aberdeen, between the graves of Bishop Dunbar and
Bishop Cunninghame.* Eloquent sermons were preached^
and many epitaphs were written, both in Latin and English
verse, upon the departed prelate. One of the quaintest of these
was the following, written by Mr. Edward Raban the first
master printer at Aberdeen.t
" Raban's Regrate, for the present loss of his very good
lord, patron, and master, Patrick Forbes, Bishop of Aber
deen, Baron of Cove and O'Neil."
" Beholde ! Alace ! here lyeth one.
Who, on this Earth, compare had none.
A Learned Patron, — Wise, and Grave,
A ConsuU good, What would you have.
Chiefe Orator of Scotland's North,
The World cannot afford his Worth.
A Prelate, and a Pastor good ;
Who in due tyme, gave Heavenlie food.
At Morne, at Noone, and Evening tyde.
Unto his Flocke, sweet Jesu's Bryde,
The Poore, with Meat, Hee fed also,
None hungry from his house did goe.
A Crosse into his Badge Hee bore,
And followed Christ, who went before.
But halfe a day, for to prepare
For Corse, with Him, and Heavenly share.
Then, Death ! Where is thy sting? Let see.
And grave ! Where is thy Victorie ?
Your Honour in the dust is spread ;
Patricke now reygnes with Christ, his Head.
Death's but a passage to convoy
Such Sayncts into their Master's joy.
The Lord prepare us, lesse and more.
To follow Him : He's gone before."
" Good Sirs, I am behind the rest,
I doe confesse, for want of skill ;
But not a whit behind the best,
To shew the affection of good will."
Edward Raban, Master Printer,
The first in Aberdeen. §
* Thi^ part of the building was weakened by Cromwell's soldiers removing
some of the stones, and in 1688 it collapsed, leaving the Bishop's tomb in the
open air.
t We shall have again to refer to Raban in connection with the history of the
Church at Keith.
§ Printing had been introduced into the Metropolis of Scotland about the year

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 19
Archbishop Gladstones died at St. Andrews on May 2nd,
1615, and was succeeded in the primacy by Archbishop Spot
tiswoode of Glasgow. The Marquis of Huntly had relapsed
to the Church of Rome, but in 1616 he was received into
communion with the Church of England by Abbot, Arch
bishop of Canterbury. It was in this same year that the
University of St. Andrews again began to confer degrees in
theology, which had been discontinued since the overthrow
of Roman Catholicism. A General Assembly met at Aber
deen, in August 1616, at which Archbishop Spottiswoode
presided, and a new Confession of Faith was agreed to. King
James 1. visited Scotland in 1617, accompanied by Bishop
Andrewes and Dr. Laud, then Dean of Gloucester. During
this royal visit, divine service according to the English rite
was performed in the Chapel Royal at Holyrood. The Scot
tish Parliament, which met in 1617, gave over to the King
the absolute right of nominating to vacant Scottish Sees, in
virtue of which power, as we have seen, the King appointed
Patrick Forbes, Episcopal minister of Keith, Bishop of Aber
deen in 1618. In August of the same year the General As
sembly met at Perth, and as has been already mentioned.
Bishop Patrick Forbes preached on the opening day. Five
articles were passed by this Assembly, enjoining (i) Kneel
ing at the reception of Holy Communion ; (2) Private Com
munion for the sick ; (3) Baptism of young children ; (4)
Confirmation ; (5) Christmas, Good Friday, Easter Day, As
cension Day, and Whitsunday to be observed as commem
orating the events appropriate to each of those days. These
articles were approved of by 86 members of the Assembly
against 45 who disapproved of them, and were afterwards
ratified by Parliament. A considerable number of minis
ters refused to obey the Perth articles, for which some
were suspended and others deprived by the High Court
of Commission. Episcopacy in Scotland owes much of
the prejudice arrayed against it to the hasty and rash
methods used sometimes on its behalf. There can be
little doubt but the Perth articles, enforced as they were
by the civil authority, did much to undermine its influ
ence in Scotland. The best of causes must suffer when re
lying on the advocacy of the sword.
In iVfay 1623 the See of Moray becoming vacant by the
death of Bishop Alexander Forbes, the Rev. John Guthrie,.
1507, and it was one hundred and fifteen years after this, in 1622, that Bishop
Patrick Forbes and the Magistrates of Aberdeen induced Edward Raban to leave
St. Andrews, and establish his printing press in Aberdeen.

20 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
one of the ministers of Edinburgh, (the author of a length
ened panegyric upon Bishop Patrick Forbes), was appointed
Bishop of Moray. With this general reference to Scottish
ecclesiastical events up to this date we now return to the
local history, with which we are specially concerned.
Rev. Robert Baron D.D., i6ig.
This clergyman was a younger son of the Fifeshire family
of Kinnaird, his brother being Dr. John Baron, Principal of
St. Salvador's College, St. Andrews. Mr. Robert Baron was
educated at St. Andrews University, where we are informed
by Clementius, his early proficiency in learning attracted the
notice of King James VI. While still a beardless youth he
took part in a discussion at the University, relating chiefly
to civil polity, in the presence of King James and a large
company of scholars, sustaining his argument with the
utmost skill and judgment. During the progress of the dis
cussion the King fixing his glance upon Baron, is said to
have bestowed upon him singular attention. At length he
condescended in person to interrogate Baron as to some
knotty point in mythology, regarding a certain daughter of
Theseus. The challenge was accepted by Baron, whose
Latin speech received the hearty commendation of the
lettered monarch. All present, it is said, admired the good
will of the King, and the sagacity and quick wit of the youth
ful disputant.
Robert Baron was nominated Professor of Philosophy at
St. Andrews in 1625, having previously in 1619 become
minister of Keith in succession to Bishop Patrick Forbes,
While at Keith he married a lady belonging to the district, *
who will be afterwards mentioned in connection with the
persecution of the Aberdeen Doctors by the Covenanters.
Arthur Johnston, the celebrated Latin scholar, addressed
several pieces to Baron, and in the following well-turned
epigram, he celebrated the praises of Baron and of William
Forbes, Bishop of Edinburgh : —
" Nil quod Forbesio, Christi dum pascit ovile
Nil quod Baronio comparet, orbis habet,
Eloquio sunt ambo pares ; discrimen in uno est.
Quo lubet, hie mentes pellicit, ille rapit."
Which may be freely translated as follows : —
¦* She is mentioned in Gordon's Scots affairs as having been " borne " in
Strathisla.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 2 1
" When Forbes and Baron guard the fold.
And feed Christ's flock safe gathered there.
No Pastor's fame has this world told
That can with their's compare.
Yet not alike they each discourse,
While one allures with gentle lore.
The other with impetuous force
Impels to heaven's bright-shore."
The Forbes here spoken of was Dr. William Forbes, first
Bishop of Edinburgh.
Dr. Baron was the author of several philosophical works,
admired for their acuteness and perspicuity. One of these,
his " Metaphysica," was used as a text-book in Foreign Uni
versities, an edition of it having been published by Antonius
Clementius, the editor of the Epistolae of Salmasius. Dr.
Arthur Johnston, the poet of the Church in the 17th century,
celebrated in a Latin Ode the great discussion which Baron
held with George TurnbuU, the Jesuit, the latter of whom
was much distinguished for virtue and learning. In ¦the
opinion of their contemporaries, the contest on each side was
conducted with great ability.
The following is the ode : —
" De Diatriba Robert! Baronii D. Theologi adversus
TrumbuUium.
En sacra Baronius movet et Trumbullius arma,
Pene sub Icariis natus uterque rotis,
Ambo Sacerdotes, divinae Palladia ambo
Artibus et calami dexteritate pares.
Hoc discrimen habes : magno molimine causam.
Hie agit Ausonii Praesulis, ille Dei."
The following is a free translation of this epigram : —
" Lo I Baron and TurnbuU are aimed for the fray,
And their weapons are cutting and keen.
Clear logical statements they aptly array.
With wise words from learned Fathers between.
Both are priests ; both were born in Icarian home.
Both in courts of Minerva have trod.
But TurnbuU disputes for the PontifT of Rome,
While good Baron is zealous for God."
Dr. Johnston, the rival of Buchanan, and the author of this
epigram, was physician to Charles I. ; he was the son of
George Johnston of that Ilk, and the Honourable Christian
Forbes, his wife, the daughter of the seventh Lord Forbes.^
Johnston, as well as Baron, belonged to that numerous band^

2 2 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
of learned scholars who, in the early part of the seventeenth
century, adorned the University of Aberdeen. In that
northern city, the light of their literary labours shone like
a glorious constellation.*
There is a. beautiful stained window in the library of King's
College, Aberdeen, in the four lights of which are the repre
sentations of Buchanan, Dr. Johnston, Ruddiman, and Dr.
Melvin, all illustrious alumni of Aberdeen University.
With the promulgation of the National Covenant, storms
of ecclesiastical strife broke upon the " Granite City." Com
missioners were sent down to Aberdeen by the General
Assembly, to win over, if possible, the citizens to the cause ofthe
Covenant. Baron, and five other of the learned doctors of
the University, prepared a series of questions for the Presby
terian Commissioners to answer. This not unnaturally drew
down the wrath of the Covenanting party, and Baron only
escaped deposition frohi his chair, by voluntary exile.
Shortly before his death, which took place at Berwick, in
August, 1639, Baron was elected to the See of Orkney, but
he never received consecration. In such a time of religious
¦strife, justice is rarely done to the memory of an opponent.
An exception to this, however, occurs in the reference to his
antagonist, by the acute and energetic Principal BaiUie. He
wrote, — •
" My heart was only sore foi good Dr. Baron ; after he had been
in London printing a treatise for the King's authoritie in Church
.affairs, I suspect too much to his country's prejudice, he returned
heavilie diseased. . . . Of this symptoms very caseable («V) more din
was made by our people than I could have wished of so meek and
learned a person." f
The year after Baron's death in 1640, the Presbyterian
General Assembly met at Aberdeen, concerning which Prin
cipal BaiUie wrote to Spang in September of that same
year,— " Our Assemblie at Aberdeen was kept with great peace. We
found great averseness in the hearts of many from our course, albeit
little countenance. Poor Baron, otherways ane ornament of our
nation, we found has been much in midtis the Canterburian way ;
great knavery and intercourse with his Grace (Archbishop Laud)
we found among them, and yet all was hid from us that they
could." §
* See " Funeral Sermons " on the death of Bishop Patrick Forbes, published
by Spottiswoode Society, page ig.
t Bishop Sydserf described Dr. Baron as "vir in omni Scholastica TheolQgia
<t omni literatura vertissimus."
§ See " Funeral Sermons," Spottiswoode Society, page 28.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 23
It is evident that some of Baron's theological opponents
hinted not obscurely that the circumstances attending
his death were a special visitation upon him for his religious
¦opinions. It was to the credit of the Presbyterian Principal
that he rebuked such profane and presumptuous judges.
Baron had attested his sincerity and consistency by abandon
ing all his earthly possessions for the sake of his faith.
The writings of Baron were examined by the tribunal of
the General Assembly. Death had placed the author himself
beyond their reach, his widow, however, was still living in
the neighbourhood of Keith. Straightway she was conveyed
to Aberdeen. The story is best told by one who was living
at the time, the " Parson of Rothiemay."*
"Dr. Robert Baron wasdeadethe year befor, yet somewhat must
be done concerning him. They thought him not orthodoxe in some of
his tenents ; therfor, such of his papers as wer unprinted they must see
them and they must be censurd and purgd. His widdow had returned
to the Strayla, wher she was borne ; therfor order was sent to [General]
Monroe with all expedition'e, for to searche the place where she
stayd, and send herself, and such papers of her husbands as she had
besyde her (if ther should be any founde), to Aberdeen under a sure
guard. This was readily obeyd by Munroe, who made the gentl
woman prisoner at the Assemblyes instance, and sent her and all
such papers as could be found besyde her, under a safe convoy to
Aberdeen ; whither she was no sooner come but she must duly ver the
key of her husbands librarye, that it might be searched for manuscripts
and letters. Some letters wer founde wryttne by the Bishopp of
Rosse, concerning the printing of the Booke of Canons, and a timber
peece of tailly du pierre, whereupon was cut the Kings arms, to be
printed into the frontispeece of that booke. Thes letters wer
publickly reade in that Assemhlye, as if they had imported some
thing very extraordinar ; but ther was none present to answer for
them. Only the printer, Edward Raban, ane Englishman, was
called upon ; and because they could not formally challendge him
for printing the Bishops canons, therfor it was objected that he had
marked (i.e. curtailled) ane common prayer in a new editione of the
psalm booke, which some yeares before he had printed in a
large octavo. It was a forme of ane evning prayer, whence he had
tackne ofthe conclusione for want of paper, it being the closure of
the last sheete of the booke, Ther wer other coppyes of that prayer
readde, and they wold needs have the printer confesse that he had
thrown away all that clause out of design, or by warrant of some
of the ministers of Aberdeen. The printer protested solemnly that
what he did was of himself, and was done for want of paper ; and
simply that if they were offended, he craved them humble pardon;
that he could instance that, except in that copy, he had never omitted
* See Gordon's Scots Affairs, III., 235-239.

24 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
to print the conclusione of that evning prayer in any other edition
of the psalmes in meeter, and should never omitte it againe. So,.
after a rebuke for his rashness in curtailing a prayer, he gott licence
to be gone, without furder censure."
After vainly trying to fasten a misdemeanour upon Edward
Raban, Baron's letters and papers were attached, his
widow being suffered to return to Strathisla. The letters, as
stated by the Parson of Rothiemay, were from the Arch
bishop of Canterbury ; and from Maxwell, Bishop of Ross,
the greatest of the Spottiswoode Bishops, and one who
took part in the drawing up of the Scottish Liturgy. At
the Restoration, Baron's relict and family received a donation
of;^20o in recognition ofthe merits ofthe deceased.
Rev. John Guthrie, A.M., 1625-1630.
Baron's successor at Keith was son of the Bishop of
Moray. He had been educated at St. Andrews, and in i630'
he was translated from Keith to Duffus. The Presbyterian
Assembly that met at Aberdeen in 1640 summoned Mr,.
Guthrie, amongst others, to appear before them to answer
for his opposition to the Covenant.* All that could be al-
ledged against this exemplary clergyman was his refusal to
sign the Covenant. He was a man of a mild temper, pious
and grave in his deportment. But he was the son of a
Bishop, and could not be passed over. Sentence was delayed
for some time in the hope that he would conform. AU was
to no purpose, and Mr. Guthrie was finally deposed for " his
constant scroupling at the Covenant." Even among his
enemies hardly any one could be found to malign this gentle
pastor, and he died before his father, most likely of a broken
heart.t Rev. Joseph Brodie, 1631-1646.
This clergyman was a son of Brodie of Brodie, and a son-
in-law of Bishop John Guthrie. In 1631 he came to Keith as
successor to his brother-in-law.
The following extracts from the Strathbogie Presbytery
Records relate to his appointment : —
At Botari.t Junij 8, 1631.— "The said day, Mr. Joseph Brodie
* _" Of the Diocese of Murrey wer cited and compeered Mr. John Guthrye,
mimsterat Duffus, in the presby try of Elgin, Sonne to the Bishopp of Murrev.
Gordon s Scots Affairs, III. 226.
t See Gordon's Scots Affairs, III. 247.
t An old parish, about 6 miles from Keith, where the Presbytery of Botary or
Strathbogie, usually met for business.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 25
produced ane presentation from the Laird of Craigivare to the
Kirk of Keyth, with ane letter from the Bischope of Murrey, desyring
ane edict to be served at the forsaid kirk with all convenient diligence,
that the said Mr. Joseph might be admitted therunto, being now
vacand be the dimissione of Mr. John Guthry, last minister ther.
The brethrein ordained thair next meeting to be at Keyth, Junij 23,
and the edict to be served the next Sonday to the forsaid day, and
lykvys appointed Mr. Joseph toteachfrom Rom. 12, v, i. ('So we
being many are one body in Christ.')
At Keyth, Junij 23rd, 1631. — "Conveined moderator and breth
rein, Mr, Robert Irving absent ; and lykvys conveined with thame
from Murrey, Mr. Gawin Dunbar, Mr. James Guthry, Mr. Patrick
TuUoch, Mr. John Peter, Mr. Alexander Spens.
" Mr. Joseph Brodie taught from Rom 12, v. i. His trauells allowed.
The other edict served to this day was produced, executed Junij 12
be Mr. George Speed, schoolmaister at Keyth. The elders quho
wer present, viz,, Alexander Gordon of Auchanachie, Patrick
Gibsone in Kilminnatie, William Chalmar in AUanbuy, Alexander
Phinnie in Couperhill, William BaiUie in Carmar, Walter Barcklay
in Keyth, Robert Calder in Achanahe, Alexander Steuart in Ard-
meile, with the body ofthe people being convened, being demandit
particularlie if thai haid any thing to objeck agains the said Mr.
j'oseph, either in doctrin, lyffe or conversationne, thai all in one
voice affirmed that thai hade no thing to say, but wer most willing
to accept of him for thair pastore ; quherupon the brethrein presentlie
ordained the moderator to give presentlie to the said Mr. Joseph
(quho wes alredy ane minister, as his letters patent from his [ ]
huir), institutione and actuall possessione to the said benefice, quhilk
he did be delyvering of the bulk of God in his hand. The breth
rein, with the elders present, gave him thair hand of fellowshipe."*
In 1632, Dr. John Maxwell was appointed Bishop of Ross.
Ecclesiastical parties in Scotland were then divided into those
who supported the Perth Articles, and those who opposed them.
A practical toleration regarding these formulas had been
brought about at the commencement of the reign of Charles
I. On the I Sth of June 1633, Charles received the Scottish
Crown at the hands of the Archbishop of St. Andrews in the
royal chapel of Holyrood. A few days after this event. Dr.
Guthrie, Bishop of Moray, preached before the King in
St. Giles' Church, Edinburgh, and on that occasion wore his
episcopal robes, a fact not lost sight of by his enemies.
Charles authorised the preparation of a new book of Canons
• " The /tf^^tfrj >«^tf«^ " here spoken of were doubtless Mr. Brodie's Letters of
Priest's Orders from his Bishop or "Diocesan," which latter word it was likely
the intention «f the clerk to have inserted in the vacant space between the
braclcets in the above quotation. Letters of Priest's Orders usually began witl>
the words, " Omnibus Catholicis tenore praesentium pateat," &c. C

26 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
for Scotland, on May 23rd, 1635. This was ill-advised and
rash, and led to the most disastrous consequences. Bishop
Patrick Forbes had always deprecated such a course of action,
and it was an irreparable misfortune for the Scottish Church
that his wise counsel was so soon forgotten. In the new
book of Canons express mention was made of the Book of
Common Prayer, Archbishop Laud having advised that
only the English Service Book should be used in Scotland.
Since the removal of the Court from Edinburgh to Lon
don, the Scottish people had been more than ever jealous of
English interference, and it was the opinion of the Scottish
Bishops that a Liturgy prepared in Scotland would be more
acceptable to the Scottish nation. In this the Bishops were
right ; the known influence of Laud was fatal to the
acceptance of the Service Book by the people who were
determined to resist its introduction. The lamentable sequel
is weU known. The new Service Book was read for the first
and last time in the High Kirk of Edinburgh on July 23rd,
1637- On Feb. 28th, 1638 the National Covenant, which had been
drawn up by the opponents. of Episcopacy, was signed at
Edinburgh by an immense multitude of people. In other
parts of Scotland a like result took place, the chief exceptions
being the Universities of Aberdeen and St. Andrews, where
the principles set forth in the National Covenant were for
mally condemned, nor did this compact receive universal
acceptance in the Strathbogie district in which Keith is
situated. The King sent down to Scotland the Marquis of Hamilton
as Royal Commissioner to effect if possible the difficult work
of restoring order in the Northern Church and Kingdom.
After Midsummer, 1638, Aberdeen was the only town in Scot
land that continued to oppose the Covenant. In this state of
matters the Covenanting party commissioned three ministers
— Henderson, Dickson and Cant — with certain laymen, includ
ing the Earl of Montrose, to proceed to Aberdeen to bring that
city over to the cause of the Covenant. As already mentioned,
Dr. Robert Baron, the ex-minister of Keith, Dr. John Forbes
and four other Doctors of the University, drew up a paper of
questions for the Commissioners to answer. The replies
given were conciliatory in tone, but faUed to convince the
citizens of Aberdeen. *
* Gordon says of this in his Scots' Affairs — "There is no question but the three
Covenanter Ministers wer ill-matched for their abilityes with the maist pairt of the^
Aberdeens doctors, and it was im^ar congressus Achitli."

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 2 7
Of the Scottish Bishops the majority sought a haven of
refuge in England, but the Bishop of Moray stood bravely to
his post. * Charles tried to stem the progress of the
Covenant by commanding his Scottish subjects to sign a
document called the Negative Confession. A General
Assembly was summoned to meet at Glasgow on November
2ist, 1638. The following minute ofthe Strathbogie Record
of September 25th, 1638, tells of the election of commissioners
for that Assembly —
" The said daye the brethren understanding that there was ane
General Assemhlye indicted by his Majestie to be holden at Glasgow
the twentie ane of November next, thought expedient to meet the
twentieth of October next, for choosing commissioners to the foresaid
Generall Assemblie ; and to this end every brother was ordained to
conveene his eldars, that out of their number they might send one to
the Presbyterie, to keep the foresaid meeting for choosing ane ruling
eldar commissioner to the Generall Assemhlye."
This Presbytery meeting was held at Botary t as arranged,
when the Rev. Joseph Brodie of Keith and the Rev. John
Annand of Kinnoir, were nominated and chosen as com
missioners for the Glasgow Assembly. When the Assembly
met, the two Scottish Archbishops and the Bishops
of Edinburgh, Galloway, Ross, and Brechin, sent in letters of
declinature protesting against the jurisdiction ofthe gathering.
It was clear to all that nothing could save Episcopacy, and
on the 28th of November the Marquis of Hanulton having
declared the Assembly dissolved, left the meeting along with
the Lords of the Council. Next day the brethren again
met as if no interruption had taken place, and declared
that Episcopacy should be abolished. Sentences were pro
nounced against the Bishops, and the most of them were
excommunicated. %
Some of the delegates were sorely perplexed as to how
* In a minute of the Presbytery Record of August ist, 1638, the latter is
mentioned for the last time as Bishop ; further on he is styled the late Bishop of
Moray. t Botary does not seem to have been a convenient place of meeting for all
members of the Strathbogie Presbytery, as shown by the following entry in the
book dated January 25th, 1637 : — " Mr. Robert Irving excused his former many
absences by the greatness of the water, which was unpassable, and his long
distance from the presbytery seat. He being removed, the brethren pitied him
in respect of his age and infirmity and admitted his excuse."
\ The so-called excommunication of Bishop Guthrie did not find favour with
the Ministers of the Moray Synod, as the Parson of Rothiemay states in anote
(Vol. I., page 129) ; — " It is uncertaine if ever this wer reade from the pulpitt of
Elgyne : howbeit it is sure that all the ministers ofthe province of Murrey refused
for to intimate the Bishop of Murrey, his excommunication, till it was putt_ upon
ane ignorant old man, called Mr. William Forbes [Sanders ? See Shaw's Hist, of
Moray p. 325] minister at Bellye.

28 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
they should reconcile the duty they owed to the King with
the obedience due to the Spiritual Court with which they
were associated. In the words ot the Rev. John Annand,
and the Rev. Joseph Brodie — Commissioners from Strath
bogie — they were "cast in two extreams." The loyalty of
these two men was commendable. They determined to quit
the Assembly, and return to their homes, but the matter did
not end there. A presbytery meeting was held at Botary on
December 13th, 1638. It was demanded from Mr. Brodie and
Mr. Annand, why they had left the Assembly so soon, seeing it
was not yet dissolved. They answered that the Marquis of
Hamilton the Royal Commissioner, having commanded the
Assembly to rise, under pain of treason, they in obedience to
that order had left the meeting and returned to their stations.
It was natural moreover that the first named clergyman,
should have no great desire to remain in attendance at an
Assembly, wherein his father-in-law the Bishop of Moray,
was treated with contumely by political and ecclesias
tical opponents. The accusation of Bishop Guthrie, who did
not appear to reply to it, was as follows : —
" Beside the breach of the cautions, that he had put on the sur
plice in the High Church of Edinburgh, anno 1633, and had then
professed that, for to please the King, he would become yet more
vile ; that he had sold churches, particularly had sold the benefice
of Aberchirder, to Mr. Richard Maitland, which, if it were true, its
like that Mr. Richard bought it dear, being accused by the Presby
tery of Strathbogie at the time for having bought it from the cedent,
(Mr, Walter Hay) ; that he had given warrant for to baptize
children begotten in fornication without consent of the ministry or
satisfaction by the party ; that he had suffered one Mr, John Peter,
to teach Arminianism, After some contest about the manner of his
censure, it was voted, because he was not personally cited, that he
should only be deposed for the time ; and, in case he make not his
puMic repentance in Edinburgh, where he had preached before King
Charles with a surplice, to the great scandal of the jealous people
there, that he shall be excommunicated, upon his refusal to submit to
the Assembly ordinance, which was afterwards accordingly done
upon his contumacy."*
The other charges made against Bishop Guthrie and his
colleagues are valueless, founded as they were upon ex parte
statements unsupported by one jot of evidence. Disregard
ing the anathemas levelled against him. Bishop Guthrie
continued to reside in his Diocese. He fortified his Castle
of Spynie, and garrisoned it when the Covenanters took arms
in 1640. Major-General Munro, at the head of 300 men,
* Gordon's Scots Affairs, II. 136.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 29
advanced against the Castle, but the Bishop was persuaded
to surrender by his son-in-law, the Rev. Joseph Brodie of
Keith, who had joined the Covenanters, seeing their cause
" like to prosper." Munro contented himself with disarming
the garrison. Carried prisoner to Edinburgh, this courageous
Prelate was lodged in the Tolbooth. In 1641, he
petitioned the General Assembly to set him at liberty ; but
as the Bishop declined to surrender his religious principles,
no heed was given to him. The Scottish Parliament was
more merciful than the Assembly, and the Bishop was re
leased, after a harsh imprisonment of 14 months, on con
dition that he should not return to his Diocese. Arthur
Johnston, the poet, described the character of Bishop Guthrie
in the foUowing lines : —
" Instruit exempio populum Guthraeus et ore ;
Pellicit hoc, illo saxea corda trahit."
" Guthrie preached Christ by life and voice,
Luring hard hearts to better choice."
The Bishop retired to his own estate of Guthrie in Angus,
where he lived tranquilly till his death.
Preparations for war were made by the King on the one
hand, and by the Covenanters on the other. In the Strathbogie
district the chief supporter ofthe Royal cause was the Marquis
of Huntly. Subscription to the Covenant was the test
imposed by the General Assembly, and those of the clergy who
declined to accept the condition were mercilessly deprived
of their benefices. Charles with the royal forces advanced
to Berwick, while the army of the Covenanters under General
Alexander Leslie, was stationed at Duns. Negotiations were
however entered into with a view to avoidtheshedding of blood.
The King on his part undertook to summon another General
Assembly to the decision of which the questions then
pending were to be referred "in such a way however that
Episcopacy should not appear to be condemned as simply
unlawful, but for poUtical reasons and as unsatisfactory to
the people."* On the 12th of August, 1639, the General
Assembly met at Edinburgh and passed an Act against the
Service Book, the Book of Canons and the Episcopal Govern
ment. Seven of the Scottish Bishops had previously sent in
a protest against the legality of this Convention.
Reverting again, to the local history which these general
historical references are intended to illustrate, we find that the
Presbytery of Strathbogie met on July loth, 1639, for the
* See Grub's History, III., 60.

30 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
purpose of arranging for the election of Commissioners to the
Assembly which was about to meet. The Kirk Sessions
were summoned, that a ruling elder might be sent
as the representative of each, to the next meeting of the.
Presbytery whose duty it was to elect Commissioners for the
Assembly itself *
This direction received little favour in some parts of
Strathbogie, the people of the district shewing their dis
approval of the Berwick compact by refusing to delegate
elders for the purpose stated. When the Presbytery met at
Botary on July 24th, 1639, the Rev. Henry Ross of Rhynie,
the Rev. Alexander Eraser of Botriphnie, the Rev. Alex.
Innes of Rothiemay and the Rev. Richard Maitland of
Aberchirder "reported that their Session had refused simply
and absolutely to obey the ordinance ofthe Presbytery." The
Keith Kirk Session however sent Mr. Patrick Gibson of
Kinminnitie to the meeting of Presbytery, and he was chosen
as their Commissioner and representative at Edinburgh.
The Scottish Parliament of 1640 set at naught the royal
authority and continuing to sit after it had been prorogued,
commanded his Majesty's subjects of all ranks to subscribe
the Covenant. To strengthen the cause ofthe Covenant in the
North of Scotland, the General Assembly met at Aberdeen on
July 28th, 1640, and at the same time a body of Covenanting
troops was quartered in Strathbogie under General Munro
to overawe the royalists in that district. The Earl Marischal
of Scotland and the Master of Forbes, who sat as ruling elders in
the Aberdeen Assembly, were stationed in the Granite City with
their regiments. It will be remembered that Monro's soldiers
were employed to escort the widow of the Rev, Dr. Baron
from Keith to Aberdeen, where it was hoped that evidence
might be wrung from her, incriminating her deceased husband.
The same troops were also employed, as we have seen, to take
possession of the Castle of Spynie and force the Bishop of
Moray to surrender.
The Commissioners sent to the Aberdeen Assembly of
1640 from the Strathbogie Presbytery, were the Rev. Joseph
Brodie of Keith and the Rev. Robert Jameson, the ruling
elder being Alexander Ogilvie of Kemphairne. No mention
is made of any refusal to send ruling elders on this occasion,
as General Munro was at hand to enforce obedience. Mr
Brodie of Keith must therefore have been a member of the
Assembly that deposed his brother-in-law, the Rev. John
? See Presbytery Book of Strathbogie, page 50.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 31
Guthrie, son of the Bishop of Moray. The Rev, Alexander
Innes of Rothiemay, who was married to the sister of Bishop
Maxwell of Ross, had already suffered deposition for refusing
to sign the Covenant,*
The Rev. Joseph Brodie of Keith, the son-in-law of good
Bishop Guthrie, conformed to the new order of things. Many
of the clergy in those grievous times were prepared to accept
either Episcopacy or Presbyterianism. The matter was one
which involved risk, not merely to their worldly status or
means of livelihood. Religious ordinances were denied to
those who refused to acknowledge the dominant ecclesiastical
system ofthe day. Thus in 1642 the Rev. Joseph Brodie
was commanded by the Presbytery not to marry a certain
couple, because they were " suspect of reUgion." The follow-
itig are the words of the Presbytery Record regarding this
case : —
" The said day it was Ordained that Nicholas Gordon, good wife
of Glengerrock, parishioner of Keith, and relict of the late Captain
Adam Gordon, who now was to be married with James Gordon, son
to Robert Gordon, BaiUie of the Enzie, who were both suspect of
religion and had not communicated there sundry years gone by, that
in no manner of way, Mr Joseph Brodie, Minister of Keith, grant
the marriage, before they subscribe the common band ofthe Presby
tery and communicate, as he will be answerable for the same."
Probably Mrs. Gordon had refused to attend the minis
trations of the Keith pastor, since his defection from Epis
copacy, t
The embers of strife were soon to be rekindled between the
King and the Covenanting Party. In England the Long
Parliament, which met in November, 1640, impeached the
Earl of Stafford and Archbishop Laud of high treason.
Scottish Commissioners were sent up to London, and these
siding with the Parliament against the King, aimed at
nothing less than the establishment of the Presbyterian
system and worship, in England itself. The King's cause was
now espoused by the Earl ot Montrose — at first it will be
remembered an ally of the Covenanters — whose master
passion from this time forth was loyalty to the Royal cause.
* His successor at Rothiemay was the Rev. James Gordon, the "parson of
Rothiemay," and author of the ' ' History of Scots Affairs," so frequently alluded
to in these pages. Mr. .Gordon was forced to subscribe the Covenant though he
had no great favour for it, and more than once ran the risk of being deposed like'
his predecessor.
t Another objector to the new system was one Lady Frendraucht, the Rev
Joseph Brodie and other members of the Presby tery_ being upon one occasion
appointed to visit that Lady "and deal with her according to the ordinance 'of the
Assembly.'

32 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
In 1641 Charles visited Scotland, but by that time he was a
King in litde more than name. In 1643 the Scottish Estates
and the General Assembly adhibited their sanction to the all
important document known as the " Solemn League and
Covenant, for reformation and defence of religion, the
honour and happiness of the king, and the peace and safety
of the three kingdoms." Those who subscribed to it bound
themselves to promote, uniformity of religion and ecclesias
tical government, and further, " without respect of persons, to
endeavour the extirpation of popery, prelacy, superstition,
heresy, schism, profaneness, and everything else contrary to
sound doctrine and the power of Godliness." Orders were
sent down to all the Presbyteries to get the League and Cov
enant sworn to and subscribed by every man and woman
under the penalty of ecclesiastical censure and confiscation
of goods. That the Covenanters had a right to band them
selves together in defence of religious liberty cannot be
denied. Now however they sought to inflict upon others,
tyranny of the very same kind from which they had
themselves so severely suffered. A Scottish army, under the
command ofthe Earl of Leven, was despatched to England,
and contributed to the establishment of the Presbyterian
Church polity, which was for a time destined to prevail
on both sides of the Tweed.
How was the promulgation of the new Standard of Faith
received in Keith and the Presbytery of Strathbogie ? The
several ministers of the Presbytery gave in their reports on
the subject at a meeting held at Botary on November 29th,
1643. The Rev. Joseph Brodie of Keith, reported that he had
read and explained the Covenant in his church and " had got
two hundred hands and above thereto."
The Rev. Robert Irving of Inverkeithing, reported that all
his people had solemnly subscribed the Covenant.
The Rev. James Gordon of Kinnoir and Dumbennan (now
Huntly) said that he had read and explained the Covenant
at both his churches and required them nomtnatim at Dum
bennan to subscribe the same ; but they all in one voice
refused till others went before them.
The Rev. Alex. Eraser of Botriphnie declared that he had
read and explained the Covenant, and had got no subscription.
" Ordained to urge the same the next day."
The Rev. Robert Watson (Grange) reported that he had
read and explained the Covenant and had got some "hands,"
but the gentry and most part of the commonalty refused to

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 33
subscribe until Thomas Innes of Pathnick should first sub
scribe ; also that George Geddes required the Covenant
to peruse, and "advise with it," and send it back to
the minister with a private subscription, with the addition for
the King and Protestant religion. The brethren thought the
subscription null, and ordered the said George to swear and
subscribe the same publicly in the Church
The Rev. Richard Maitland (Aberchirder) reported that all
had subscribed the Covenant within his parish except two.
The Rev. George Chalmers (Rhynie) reported that he had
explained the covenant in both his Kirks, and would get the
subscriptions next Sabbath.
The Rev. William Reid (Gartly) reported that he had read
and explained the Covenant, but had got no subscriptions
save his own.
It appears from the Strathbogie Presbytery Record (p. 41)
that on the 29th of November, 1643, only one minister in the
Presbytery could state that all his people had signed the
Solemn League and Covenant. Four parishes had distinctly
refused to subscribe that document, and compulsion was
accordingly resorted to, the penalties being excommunica
tion, and confiscation of goods and gear. Accordingly, when
the Presbytery met on December 20th, some progress was
reported regarding the forced subscriptions wrung from a
reluctant people. Even the active minister of Keith could
not persuade all the members of his flock to subscribe, for
there, John Ogilvie — the ruins of whose castle yet remain
near the Linn of Keith — John Coupland of Haughs, and "40
or 50 ofthe meaner sort"* declined to conform.
At Gartly only 10 people had subscribed, and at Botriphnie
many were reported to have subscribed, but without having
sworn, and many had done neither one nor the other. The
brethren were straightway ordained " to urge a perfect sub
scription of the whole congregations against the next meet
ing, and to bring the names of non-subscribers under their
hands to the Presbytery." The Rev. Joseph Brodie of Keith
appears to have become very zealous in the prosecution of
these recusants, witness the following passage in the Presby
tery Book of Strathbogie : —
" The same day, Mr. Joseph Brodie, produced a letter from Mr.
David Dalgleish, showing his diligence with the processes of excom
munication left with him by the >aid Mr. Joseph at the last General
Assembly, viz., that he had delivered their [ ] to the treasurer
* Presb\ tery Records.

34 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
depute, that order may be given for letters of horning and caption,
upon the King's Majesty's charges ; and because he saw no ap
pearance of execution that way in haste, some of the ministry and
he, did recommend to the Committee of Estates, that speedy course
may be taken thereanent, which their lordships have promised to
do, and also promised to do such like with those whom the Presby
tery had sent over, presently."*
On March 31st, 1644, some of the brethren ofthe Presby
tery having enquired if those who had not subscribed the
solemn League and Covenant should be admitted to the
sacrament ofthe Lord's Supper, the question was referred to
the Provincial Assembly " in respect some whole congrega
tions (except so few) had not subscribed the same."t
Such was the ecclesiastical strife provoked by the Solemn
League and Covenant in Scotland. Meanwhile, the civil war
was raging in England between the king and parliament.
In 1642 the battle of Edgehill was fought, and though con
spicuous bravery was displayed by both armies, the result was
long doubtful. The Scottish forces eventually turned the scale,
and brought victory to the side of the parliament. At Marston
Moor the royalists were also defeated by'the united strength
of the parliamentary and Scottish troops. The General
Assembly found Cromwell and his invincible Ironsides at
first a useful ally, but they were to find him, in days to come
a determined foe.
It was in the year of Marston Moor that the Marquis
of Montrose began in Scotland his career of victory on
behalf of the King. Six battles were fought and won
by him for his royal master, with the result that all Scotland
lay at his feet, the Estates having for the time no army
in the field. The hopes of Charles now turned to the
north, and he despatched Sir Robert Spottiswood as the
bearer of a royal commission appointing the Marquis of
Montrose lieutenant-governor of Scotland. Montrose relied
mainly upon his Highland levies which were capable alike of
prolonged fatigue during forced marches, and of making
resistless onsets in the day of battle. At Philiphaugh in 1645,
a reverse eventually came. Montrose was surprised by Gen
eral David Leslie at a time when he was unsupported by his
Highland clansmen. The rout was complete, and the hopes of
King Charles in Scotland were shattered at one blow. Mon
trose himself escaped, but many prisoners were taken.
The cry for vengence on the " Malignants," arose through-
* See Presbytery Book of Strathbogie, p, 49,
t See Strathbogie Book, p. 51. <

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 35
out the provincial Synods, and neither the General
Assembly, nor the Convention, were slow to listen.
The Irish prisoners taken at Philiphaugh were executed
without any regular trial at all. Lord Ogilvie, eldest
son of the Earl of Airlie, Sir Robert Spottiswood, son
bf the late Archbishop of St. Andrews ; Andrew Guthrie, son
of the Bishop of Moray, and others, were tried and con
demned to death by the Scottish Convention. Lord Ogilvie
escaped from prison ; the others, however, were beheaded
at St. Andrews.* The crime of these unfortunate men was
none other than loyalty to their king and to the cause of the
fallen Episcopate.
The decisive battle of Naseby, fought in the same year as
Philiphaugh, extinguished the hopes of the royal cause in
England. In the foUowing year the king fled for refuge to
the Scottish army then besieging Newark. Every mark of
outward respect was paid to the unfortunate monarch, but
he was treated as a prisoner rather than a king. At the be
ginning of 1647, the Scottish estates resolved to surrender the
king to the English parliament. The sum of ^100,000 was
paid to the Scottish army as a first instalment of pay for
past services, and Charles was handed over in person to the
Commissioners of the parliament. Keith itself narrowly es
caped being the scene of what might have been a sanguinary
engagement in 1645. Flushed with his victory at Auldearn
the Marquis of Montrose had advanced eastward to Strath
isla, with the intention of protecting Gordon Castle from the
Covenanting army under General BaiUie. The infantry of
the latter were posted on a rising ground above the Old Town
of Keith, while the cavalry held a narrow pass through which
Montrose's army was advancing from Achynachie. A chal
lenge sent by Montrose to BaiUie received the curt answer
that the latter " would not receive fighting orders from his
enemy." The armies eventually withdrew, without crossing
swords, t
The people in the district of Keith in the 17th century
were not allowed to lose sight of public events. Thus in
* See Grub's History, III., 115.
t Montrose had sympathisers in Strathisla. Some years subsequently to the-
period here commented upon the Rev. Robert Watson, minister of Grange, was
charged before the Presbytery with sending men to join Montrose, and furnishing
them with sword and musket. It was also stated that the minister's servant,
Alexander Achynachie, was present at the battle of Auldearn :— " His_ seruand,
Alexander Achynachie, was at the battell of Old Earne, with the minister his-
own halbert in his hand, quhervith he claimed the killing of the Laird Lares, and
is called Lares to this day." The Church of Grange was distant 3 miles from.
Keith.

36 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
June 1644 the excommunication of Montrose was intimated
by order of the General Assembly, from the pulpits of all the
churches in Strathbogie. In July ofthe same year a Thanks
giving day was ordered in the Strathbogie district for the
parliamentary victory at Marston Moor, and money vvas
collected in the neighbourhood, for the use of the Scottish
army in England.
The Rev. Joseph Brodie was sent a second time as Com
missioner to the General Assembly of 1644. Another
¦General Assembly which met in 1645 took into consideration
the Directory of Worship sent down for that purpose by the
Scottish Commissioners in London. At this meeting the
Rev. Joseph Brodie once again appeared .as the representa
tive of the Strathbogie Presbytery. Though a man of great
energy of character and blameless life, Mr, Brodie's deser
tion of Episcopacy after his effusive protestations of loyalty to
the Marquis of Hamilton cannot be condoned,
Alexander, Laird of Brodie at this time, was a man of strong
religious convictions, but of somewhat narrow views. In
1653 he received a summons to attend the Protector in Lon
don. The citation was a source of great perturbation of mind
to the recipient, who wrote for advice to the Rev. Joseph
Brodie his uncle, and several other friends and relations.
His own feeUngs are emphatically noted in his diary (1652-85),
which is still preserved. " Oh Lord I " he writes, " I have
met with the lion and the bear before, but this is the Goliath ;
the strongest and greatest temptation is last."*
The diary shows that both uncle and nephew were men
-of decided opinions. In estimating the character of the min
ister of Keith, allowance must be made for the hardness of
the times. The Rev. Joseph Brodie was translated to Forres
in 1646, and died on the 27th of October, 1656.
There was a vacancy in the Church at Keith of some
duration after Mr. Brodie's translation. During the
interregnum several candidates were presented to the
benefice, but none of these presentations were implemented
by the Presbytery. At last, Sir William Forbes of Craigievar
the Patron, sent a blank presentation to General David Leslie,
the Covenanting general, who having inserted in it the name
-of his own chaplain, Mr. William Kininmont, appointed him
minister of Keith. In due time the Strathbogie Presbytery
inducted Mr. Kininmont to the charge.
'* (See Brodie Diary, page 57.)

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 37-
The Marquis of Montrose having received a Commission
from the exiled monarch, Charles 1 1., landed in Scotland.
Very stringent terms had been proposed to the king by
the Scottish estates, as a condition of their espousing his
cause. Montrose had advised his royal Master to reject
these and trust to the success of a miUtary enterprise.-
The Marquis embarking at Hamburg with a slender force,
landed on one of the Orkney Islands, and from thence passed
over into Caithness. Advancing towards the South he fell
into an ambuscade prepared for him by Colonel Strachan,
who was in command ofthe Covenanting forces in the North.
Strachan had only 300 cavalry with him. He however gained
a complete victory, and pursued Montrose to some distance
from the battle-field. *
This took place at Drumcarbisdale on the borders of Ros-
shire, on April 27th, 1650.
The Marquis made good his escape for the time, but
afterwards fell into the hands of Macleod of Assynt, who
delivered him to the Scottish Estates. Carried to Edin
burgh he was subjected to every kind of insult. On
their way to the Capital, the prisoner and his guard halted
at the town of Keith. As it happened, it was on a
Sunday, when the Rev. William Kininmont, t General
Leslie's ex-chaplain, was, for some reason or other, about to-
perform Divine Service in the Churchyard. The preacher
changing his subject, delivered a discourse for the benefit of
the captive hero, choosing as his text the words — " As thy
sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be
made childless, among women." A more cowardly insult to
a helpless man, could hardly be imagined, and it drew
forth expressions of disapprobation from partizans on both
sides who were present. The conduct of Montrose himself
on this occasion was marked by becoming dignity, for merely
saying to the preacher, " Rail on," he paid no further attention
to his words. Doubtless Mr. Kininmont supposed that his
* It is interesting to note that Colonel Strachan belonged to a branch of a
family that ^ave three Bishops to the Church. Sir James Strachan, afterwards
Episcopal minister of Keith, belonged to another branch of the same family.
t One of the first things accomplished by Mr. Kininmont on his coming to-
Keith was a change in regard to the time of holding the Keith markets. The
regular market at Keith was customarily held on Saturday, but this was found
to interfere with the due observance ofthe Sunday thereafter, and the matter had^
been referred to the. General Assembly. The following extract from the Record
announces the change of the market-day from the Saturday to the Friday.-
"Anent the reference from the Assemblie for the changing of Saturdayes mercat,
Mr. William Kininmont reported that Keith was proclaimed to be on Frydday-
nixt, and so fourth in tym coming."

38 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
action would be gratifying to his patron. General Leslie, who
had been despatched to the north, with a corps of 4000 men.
The last scene was enacted at Edinburgh on the 25th of
May, 1650. The Author of the Lays of the Scottish
Cavaliers has given expression in the following lines, to the
last thoughts of the great Marquis : —
" For truth and right, 'gainst treason's might,
This hand has always striven ;
And ye raise it up for a witness still,
In the eye of earth and heaven.
Then nail my head on yonder tower,
Give every town a limb ;
And God who made shall gather them,
I go from you to Him,"
The Scottish nobles who entered into an agreement for the
defence of the king, had adherents in Keith, One of these
was George Ogilvie, residing probably in the Castle of
Milton at the Linn of Keith.
" The said day, George Ogilvie in Keith having beine ane
leivtenant upon the late unlawful engadgment, gave in his suppli
cation, confessing the evil and wickedness thereof, humblie requyring
to be receaved into the League and Covenant. He was ordained to
be receaved in his owne parish kirk, according to the Act of the
Generall Assemblie."*
The Scottish Presbyterians were now to discover in their
former allies, dangerous and implacable foes. As Presbyter
ianism in England had overthrown Episcopacy, so it was in
its turn overthrown by the English Independents, backed by
Cromwell and his Ironsides. The Presbyterians of Scotland
naturally resented this, while Cromwell on the other hand was
embittered against the Scdttish people, on account of their
leanings towards Prince Charles, News arrived in the north
that Cromwell intended to invade Scotland. Preparations
were made on all hands to resist the invasion, and in the
Presbytery of Strathbogie, a letter was read from the
Presbytery of Edinburgh, urging immediate contributions of
money for miUtary purposes. This letter stated, —
" That the Parliament had taken course for a present and speedie
levie in reference to the defence of the country against these men
whose successe, in all appearance, void bring forth ruin of religione
and government among us ; quherupon it was thought expedient
that everie minister sould contribute according to the proportion sett
doune in the said letter for ane regiment of horss, to be presentlie
levied for that said expedition."
* Presbytery Book of Strathbogie, 5th June, 1650, page 143.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 39
Commissioners from the Scottish Parliament and General
Assembly, were also sent to Charles on the Continent, one of
them being Alexander Brodie of Brodie, the author of the
first part of the diary already quoted. The foUowing
reference to this event occurs in his journal : —
" I was chosen unwillingly to be a judge, and was sent to the
Hague one of the Commissioners for the king. The Lord did in
this keep me up from affecting the favour of the man, or goeing
about to compass it ... I was sent back the next year to Breda,
quhen I observed notable prouidences accompanying our voyage, and
assistance with our ministers promising something ; and we did
speed." *
The Commissioners when at Breda hearing that the king
was about to receive Holy Communion, sent in a written re
monstrance against " the use of the gesture of kneeling," and
declared that this would " provoke the anger of God " against
his Majesty. This remonstrance signed by Mr. Brodie and
the other Commissioners, exhibits the humiliating conditions
forced upon Charles as well as the narrow religious views of
the Laird of Brodie and those who accompanied him. Charles
finally agreed to the terms imposed in favour ofthe Covenant.
Landing at Speymouth, about 12 miles from Keith, on June
23rd, 1650, the king proceeded to Edinburgh. There he was
made to sign a declaration professing sorrow for his mother's
idolatry and promising to promote the ends of the Covenant
in the reformation of the Church of England.
The regicides, who had established the Commonwealth
in England, looked upon the recognition of Charles as
a declaration of war. Cromwell invaded Scotland, but was
well nigh outwitted by the prudence and sagacity of General
David Leslie whose troops protected the Capital. The
English army retreated to Dunbar, closely followed by Leslie.
There, against his own judgment, but over-persuaded by the
Covenanting ministers in his camp, Leslie attacked
Cromwell's army, and was completely defeated. Edinburgh
capitulated soon after, and Cromwell's troops over-ran Scot
land, penetrating as far as Strathbogie and Inverness.
The General Assembly met at St. Andrews on July 16th,
165 1 — Rutherford, Gillespie, Guthrie, Cant, and other Presby
terian ministers,having sent in a protest against the lawfulness
of the meeting. From this time the Presbyterians were
divided into two parties, designated at first by the names of
Resolutioners and Protesters. The landing of English troops
in Fife had the effect of dispersing the conclave.
* See Brodie's Diary, page 140.

40 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
Charles, who had been crowned at Scone on ist January,
165 1, now determined to march into England, leaving Fife
shire in the hands of Cromwell's soldiers. At Worcester he
was overtaken by Cromwell himself, who put the royalists
to utter rout. After remaining in concealment for some time
the King escaped to the Continent. Scotland was now; entirely
in the hands of Cromwell, whose representatives dismissed
the Assembly which met at Edinburgh in 1653, and prohibit
ed its meeting again. Such high-handed policy depended
for its success on the master mind by which it had been
initiated and directed. With the death of the Protector, it
was seen that the civil and ecclesiastical systems set up
by him in England were alien to the feelings of the English
people. England, indeed, went "mad with joy" when, in
1660, the Restoration was at length accomplished. The re
storation of the Episcopacy was equally welcomed.
The Scottish Parliament of 1661, declared the Solemn
League and Covenant to be no longer binding.*
A royal proclamation at the Cross of Edinburgh,
announced the king's intention to restore the Episcopal form
of Church Government in Scotland. Sydserf, Bishop of
Galloway, was the only surviving prelate of the Spottiswoode
line, and it was resolved to fill up the vacant Sees by raising
certain ofthe Presbyterian ministers to the Episcopate. The
See of Orkney was bestowed on Sydserf, the new Primate
being the Rev. James Sharp, minister of Crail. This was an
unfortunate appointment in many respects. Sharp was the
envoy who had been sent to the king to plead the cause of
Presbyterianism, and his elevation to the office of Primate,
gave rise to grave suspicions of his sincerity, besides
causing him to be styled a traitor by the Presbyterians-
Andrew Fairfoul, minister of Dunse, was appointed Arch
bishop of Glasgow, and James Hamilton, minister of Cam-
busnethan, was nominated Bishop of Galloway. The
Bishopric of Dunblane was offered to the gentle and peace-
loving Robert Leighton. These four divines were con
secrated at Westminster Abbey on December 15th, 1661, by
the Bishops of London, Worcester, Carlisle and Llandaff,
On the 7th of May following, the Bishops designate of Dun
keld, Moray, Ross, Caithness and the Isles, were consecrated
at Holyrood. Soon afterwards the new Prelates took
their seats in the Parliament at Edinburgh.
* It was at this time that a royal gift of ^^200 was given to the widow and
children of Dr. Robert Baron,, who were residing at Strathisla.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 41
However thankful Episcopalians of the present day may
be for the privileges handed down to them, they cannot but
regret the unconstitutional way in which the restoration of
the Episcopal polity was accomplished. No attempt was
made to consult the Scottish people, and as is well known
in the West and South of Scotland the popular feeling was de
cidedly adverse to Episcopacy. An arbitrary act of the
secular power decided an all-important question that should
have been first of all submitted to the unfettered judgment of
the General Assembly.
The new Bishop of Moray was the Rev. Murdoch
Mackenzie, minister of Elgin, who had been a member of the
Glasgow Assembly in 1638. Bishop Mackenzie was conse
crated at Holyrood on May 7th, 1661, and the Moray Synod
was directed to meet on the second Tuesday of October
1661. Mr. Kinninmont, the minister of Keith, died in October,
1664. During his ministry he took an active part in the
ecclesiastical affairs of the Keith district. He appears to
have conformed to Episcopacy and to have accepted collation
from Bishop Mackenzie.
The dominant party, now, alas ! reproduced only too faith
fully the repressive and intolerant poUcy that had been the
outcome of the fanatical zeal of their adversaries.
An Act of Parhament passed on June 9th, 1662, declared
that all ministers admitted after 1649, should be "deprived,"
unless, before September 20th, they obtained presentation
from the patrons of the livings, and collation from the
Bishop of the Diocese. Although the operation of the Act
was delayed till February, 1663, many ministers in the
southern and central districts of Scotland, resigned their
charges, rather than submit to the conditions imposed. The
successors of those who were deprived, for the most part
young men from northern districts, were not successful in
winning the affection of the people. They were the in
feriors also, in many respects, of those for whom they had been
substituted. In 1663 an Act was passed by which all who
absented themselves from their own parish churches on
Sundays, were to be fined in proportion to their rank.
The High Commission Court was now tevived, and in
creased severities imposed upon the Non-conformists through
out the country. The consequent risings of the Covenanters .
in the West were put down by the sword. Retaliation super
vened, reaching a climax in the murder of the Archbishop D

4? The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
of St. Andrew's upon Magus Muir. The mild counsels
of Bishop Leightpn, and the attitude of disapproval adopted
by some of the Scottish Prelates, in regard to the harsh.
measures of the Government, mitigate to some extent the
darkness of the picture. ' f
To proceed with the local history, —
Rev. Sir James Strachan, 1665.
Mr. Strachan, afterwards Sir James Strachan, Bart., of
Thornton, graduated at King's College, Aberdeen, on March
28th, 1660. In 1665 he became minister of Keith. In the
Keith baptismal register, his name appears as Sir James
Strachan of Thornton. He no longer possessed the ancestral
estates of his family, though he still retained the lands of
Pittendreich which formed at one time a part ofthe paternal
inheritance. The following rhyme preserves the several
titles which belonged to this clergyman :—
"The beltit Knight o' Thornton,
And Laird o' Pittendreich
Arid Maister James Strachan,
Minister 0' Keith."* '
In 1676 Bishop Murdoch Mackenzie was translated from
Moray to Orkney, and the Rey. James Atkins, a clergyman
holding an English benefice, was appointed to the See of
Moray. Bishop Atkins, after presiding over the Diocese of
Moray for three years, was transferred to Galloway. On the
Festival of St. Simon and St. Jude, 1679, the Rey. Colin
Falconer, minister of Forres, was consecrated Bishop of
Moray. He died at Spynie Castle in 1686, and was succeeded
by the Rev. Alex. Rose, a descendant ofthe family of Kilravock.
Before actually entering upon his duties as Diocesan in
Moray,- Bishop Rose was appointed Bishop of Edinburgh.
The Right Rev. William Hay became Bishop of Moray in
1688. 'This Prelate who- disapproved entirely of the harsh
measures used against the Presbyterians, was deprived ofthe
temporalities of his See at the Revolution.
As has been already stated the Rev. Sir James Strachan
was deprived by the Scottish Privy Council for refusing to read
the Proclamation of William and Mary. So far from doing so,
'* The family of Strachan was connected by marriage with that of a former
minister of Keith, viz., Bishop Patrick Forbes. No less than three Bishops were
scions of the Strachan family. Tbe Right Rev. David Strachan became Bishop
of Brechin in 1661, and in 1787 the Right Rev. John Strachan became Co-adjutor
Bishop ofthe same See. The third prelate ofthe same name and family, was the
Right Rev. John Strachan, appointed Bishop of Toronto in 1839.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 43
the minister of Keith prayed publicly for the restoration of
King James to the throne ofhis fathers. Dr. Gordon in his
Chronicles of Keith says of the ousting of this clergyman —
" His library was tossed into the streets, and a few odd
volumes only remain which were picked up and are preserved
in the North Vestry ofthe Church."* Had this statement
been made concerning the library of a deposed Episcopal
clergyman in the South or West of Scotland, we should under
stand at once that the books were thrown out by the mob. It
is evident however from the Strathbogie Records quoted on
page 55, that the majority of the Keith parishioners were
opposed to the deposition of their clergyman. The proba
bility is that a few of the opposite party made a sudden "
attack upon the library of Sir James, but were prevented
from completing the work of destruction by the arrival upon :
the scene of some of his supporters. This view is sup
ported by the fact that 1 1 years elapsed before the Strathbogie
Presbytery were able to induct a Presbyterian minister to the
parish of Keith. Rev. Lachlan Rose, M.A., 1692.
This Clergyman, who, had been at Carmichael, was in
truded on November 2n(i, 1692, in accordance with an agree
ment with the heritors. A Commission of the General
Assembly which met on June 20th, 1694, found that he had
" intruded," and discharged him to preach any longer. On
the 29th of the same month an intimation was made to this
effect, and the charge at Keith subsequently remained vacant •
for some years'. It was not until after the lapse of six years,,
that the Rev. John Gilchrist, the first regularly appoin.ted
Presbyterian Minister after the Revolution, settled at Keith.
This fact is significant of the firm ground occupied by Episco
pacy in the district, where indeed, had it not been for the course
of political events, the Church might have continued to the
present day as strong numerically, as she was at the end of
the 17th century.
* The books now remaining from the Rev. Sir James Strachan's .
library are 23 in number. Among them are the following : —
"Dubiorum Evangelicorum — Pars prima." Date of publication,
1639- " The Christian Doctrine of the Eucharist in' all ages in answer to
what M. Arnaud, Doctor of the Sorbonne, alledges touching the be
lief of the Greek, Muscovite, Jacobite, Nestorian, Coptic, Maronite '
and other Eastern Churched, whereunto is added an account of the"

44 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
Thoughts suggested by the Foregoing Narrative,
Englishmen visiting Northern Britain, frequently wonder
at the different estimate of Episcopacy, which obtains on
either side of the Border. South of the Cheviot Hills, the
exalted and apostolic office of Bishop is respected and vene
rated, while North of the Tweed, the Episcopate is looked
upon by the mass of the people, if not with actual repugn
ance, as being at least, unnecessary to the proper organisation
ofthe Church. The reasons for this difference of opinion, must
be sought among the records of the past, and especiaUy those
deahng with the several introductions, or rather re-introduc
tions of Episcopacy into Scotland.
In the first place the Scottish people were not pre-disposed
to favour Episcopacy from their acquaintance with that cari-
Book of the Body and Blood of our Lord, published under the name
of Bertram in six books." Date of publication, 1684.
" Decapla in Psalmos sive Commentarius ex decem MSS. et
impressis, Heb. Arab. Syr. Chald. Rabbin. Graec. Rom. Ital. Hisp. Gallic.
A Joanne Viccaro Anglo,"
There is also a book by Thomas Hobbes, the date of publication
being 1660, The title of this book is " Examinatio et Emendatio
Mathematicae Hodiernae, Quails explicatur in libris Johannis
Wallisii Geometrise Professoris Saviliani in Academia Oxoniensi, >
distributa in sex Dialogis." There remains also a number of
Histories of the Early Church in large folio volumes all written in.
Latin, a single volume being assigned to each Century. One of these^
is mouldering away from the effect of damp. Date of publication,
1562. " Operum Theologicorum D. Hieronyni Zanchii Tomus
Quartus 1615." One huge volume is in veritable oak boards, and
contains an account of the Martyrs of the Lutheran and Anglican
Communions, with pictorial illustrations. A Greek Dictionary, a
New Testament Commentary in Latin of the date 1542, and a Latin >
Commentary on the first Epistle to the Corinthians and dated 1609,
are also among these lelics of the past. On one ofthe books was
written the words — " Ex bibliothecS, Strathbogiensi," evidence of the
books having probably belonged to the Episcopal Presbytery of
Strathbogie, previous to the Revolution of 1688. We may infer (rom
what remains, that the library as a whole must have been of con
siderable importance, a proof moreover that the Episcopal Clergy in
the North of Scotland at the Revolution Period, were men of letters
and lovers of learning. It was not without emotion that the writer
looked upon these mementoes of a past the consequences of which,
so disastrous at the time, have nevertheless been so mercifully over
ruled for good to the Church in Scotland.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 45
cature of Episcopacy which existed in Scotland after the fall of
the Roman hierarchy and previous to the accession of James
VI. to the English throne. The names of Tulchan and Titular
Bishops remind us of the abuses that took place under the
cloak of Episcopacy so called. There existed Bishops or so-
called Bishops, who had never been enrolled rightful members
of the Historic Episcopate at all, never having received conse
cration. Appointments to the Episcopal office were some
times made conditionally upon the surrender of a portion of
the revenues of the See to satisfy the covetousness of the
Patrons. The corruptions too frequently attributable to the
Roman hierarchy, and the debasement and bribery of Tul-
chanism, were amply sufficient to direct suspicion against
the system when re-introduced into Scotland by the Spottis
woode line. It was also an evil tendency of the time to make
too much of the appointment by the secular power, and to
regard the spiritual authority of the sacred office as of little
or no account.
Neither must it be forgotten that in the Seventeenth cen
tury, toleration and religious liberty were principles little un
derstood. When Episcopacy was in the ascendant, an
attempt was made to force its acceptance upon all classes and
Creeds of the Scottish nation. On the other hand, Presby
terians forgetting their own sufferings under persecution,
attempted to compel universal adherence to the two Cove
nants, and that irrespective of Creed. Nor was this policy
confined to Scotland, for as we have seen when opportunity
offered, Presbyterianism was introduced into England
not merely without the consent, but in direct antagonism to
the views of the great mass of the English people. Men and
women were, in fact, treated as dumb and irrational beings,
and ordered to change their Creed at the bidding of eccles
iastical and civil rulers. Religious equality was looked upon
in those days as an idle dream. But Divine Providence was
at work, and there were evolved in due time the grand
principles of civil and religious liberty.
The time chosen for the re-introduction of Episcopacy into
Scotland at the beginning of the Seventeenth century, was in
itself very inopportune, the nation being on the eve of a
tremendous struggle for constitutional liberty. The exag
geration of the royal prerogatives, which ultimately caused
the expulsion of the Stuart line from the British throne, was
as fatal to Episcopacy as to the reigning house. William III.
was a " Deliverer " in more senses than one. When he re
established Presbyterianism in Scotland, he caused the

.46 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
Solemn League and Covenant to be laid aside for ever, and
thus saved Scotland from one ofthe worst forms of ecclesias
tical tyranny. He also delivered the Episcopal Church of
Scotland from the shackles which fettered her, and enabled
her in after days to send the first Anglican Bishop to the
States of America, when the Church of England was pre
vented from doing so, by the enactments of the civil power.
The Disestablishment of the Episcopal Church of Scot
land in 1688, has been to the advantage of that Church.
Numbers are not always a sign of real strength ; and it may
be said, without exaggeration, that the Episcopal Church of
Scotland is stronger to-day than she was at the period of
Disestablishment in 1688. Who for one moment would pre
fer the " trimming, trembling, truculent, and overbearing
Canterbury" of the 17th century, as it appeared in Scotland,
to the Episcopal Church of to-day?* What faithful son of
the Church would wish to exchange her liberty for dependence
upon the arm ofthe State and of despotic power ?
Again, the English Reformation did not involve such a
complete ecclesiastical revolution, as the like event in
Scotland. In the latter country the Reforming in
fluences acted chiefly from without, in England from
within, the Bishops and clergy of the Church taking
part in the movement. The English reformers ex
punged Roman superstitions and errors from the services,
but they endeavoured to retain whatever was Scriptural,
Primitive, and truly Catholic. More sweeping in its
measures, the Scottish Reformation was accomplished in
antagonism to the representatives of the former r'egime.
What a change has taken place in the fortunes of our Com
munion ! Not only is her Liturgy faithfully rendered
but a love for it is gradually and surely spreading beyond
her fold. One of the Perth Articles which kindled a flame
of religious strife over half the country, related to the obser
vance of the principal Festivals of the Church. Now, the
bells of Presbyterian Churches are heard calling together
worshippers on Christmas Day.
All parties must now regret the sins and follies com
mitted by our forefathers in the name of religion, and
regarding these "let the dead past bury its dead." A
welcome change it is in the present time, to turn our thoughts
to union instead of division. If the great work of Christian
union be delayed, we should not forget that God's delays are
* See Scottish Gudrdian, volume XL, page 595.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth: Century. 47
not denials. All the firmer wiU be the union, the iiearer both
sides draw to each other in Evangelical truth and Apostolical
order. WhUe we wait for God's own time for corporate union, we
can pray to Him that he will graciously prepare the way for
the unity that is agreeable to His Divine Will. The
ecclesiastical history of the 17th century teaches that it is to
no purpose simply to give the outward form of Episcopacy to
a system which does not accept Apostolic doctrine at the
same time. No real union will ever be brought about unless
with the willing consent and approbation of all concerned.
May the prayer of Jesus for His own, be fulfilled in the com
ing time — " That they all may be one ; as Thou Father art
in me and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us."
(John xvii. 21.)

SEVENTEENTH CENTURY REMINISCENCES OF
THE DIOCESE OF MORA Y.

The Laird of Brodie, and the Bishops of Moray.
In the course of previous articles, reference has been made
to the Diary kept by Alexander Brodie of Brodie, from
which much important information is derivable concerning
the ecclesiastical affairs of the Diocese of Moray, in the seven
teenth century. A brief notice of the Author of the Diary
may not be without interest.
The family of which Brodie of that Uk was the head,
is one of the oldest in the province of Moray. Alexander was
the eldest son of David Brodie of Brodie, and was born on
July 25th, 1617. He was a student in King's College, Aber
deen, but did not graduate in that University. He was served
heir to his father in 1636.
At the Disestablishment of 1638, Brodie declared in favour
of Presbyterianism. His retiring disposition prevented him
from taking a prominent part in the controversies of the day.
He was, however, implicated in an iconoclastic proceeding,
which lovers of sacred art will not readily forgive. Along
with Gilbert Ross, the Minister of Elgin, the young Laird of
Innes and others, Brodie entered the stately Cathedral of
Elgin, and destroyed two paintings of the Crucifixion and
the Day of Judgment, together with some fine carved work in
side the Church.

48 The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
Retribution for this sacrilege eventually overtook the Laird
of Brodie, whose house was burned and whose lands were
plundered by the followers of Montrose. The family records
were at the same time destroyed or taken away.*
In 1649 Brodie of Brodie was made an Ordinary Lord of
Session, and in 1653 he was cited by Cromwell to London to
further a project of the Protector's for an incorporating union
between England and Scotland. Appointed a judge in 1658, his
labours in that capacity were of short duration, for he was
superseded at the Restoration..
The Diarist happened to be resident in London when
the four divines chosen to be Bishops in Scotland, were pre
sented for Consecration. His remarks with reference to
Bishop Leighton are interesting. On September 31st he
writes :— " I heard Mr. Leighton inclined to be a Bishop,
and did observe his loose principles before, anent Surplice,
Ceremony and Papists," Leighton was in favour of toleration
to the Roman Catholics, a point about which the Laird was
more than doubtful.
On the 25th of October he again writes ; — " Mr.
Leighton dined with me. I perceived he was not
averse from taking on him to be a Bishop : all was clear
to him, civil places free from censures : he approved the
organs, anthems, music in their worship. He said the
greatest error among Papists was their persecution and
want of charity to us. His intention was to do good in that
place, and not for ambition. He was against defensive arms :
men in Popery holding all their tenets might be saved. He
had no scruple in anything which they did, repeating oft
this word. Religion did not consist in these external things,
whether of government or ceremonies, but in righteousness,
peace and joy. I prayed for him as for myself, and was
feared that his charity misguided might be a snare to him.
He said he had signed and swore the Covenant, and had
these same thoughts then, that the Covenant was rashly
entered into, and is now to be repented for."
Brodie was under the erroneous impression that the
newly appointed Bishops would not accept re-ordina
tion at the hands of the English Prelates. Concerning this
he says, " I acknowledge the Lord in this." Further on
he corrects his mistake, " I heard," he says, "Mr. Sharp and
Leighton were re-ordained, and scrupled at nothing." Fair-
foul and Hamilton were not ordained Deacon and Priest,
* Defective titles arising from this, were afterwards remedied by an act of the
Scottish Parliament.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 49
before consecration, having already received orders from the
Spottiswoode line. Of a service which he attended in
Westminster Abbey, Brodie remarks, " I beheld the adminis
tration ofthe Sacrament inWestminster,and albeit I was stum
bled at their affected gestures,bowing and cringing at the table
before their altar, and bowing at every time they named the
name of Jesus, their clothing, their kneeling, their twice con
secrating of wine, because they brought some more than at
the first, yet I thought they might partake savingly with
them. They had materially the Sacrament of the Lord's
Body rightly administered. He called it a sacrifice of praise."
Brodie left London on May 14th, 1662, having had an
audience of the King on the previous day. Concerning his
interview with Charles he made this observation : —
" Yesterday I had access to the King, and kissed his hand. Now
I desire to reckon this as a mercy, considering how men have
laboured to prejudge him against me. It was more than I almost
looked for ; now I lean on him all that concerns me."
After his return to Scotland, the author of the diary re
sided either at Brodie or in its immediate neighbourhood.
He acted as one of the Commissioners for the trial of the
unfortunate class of women then called witches, and his
duties often gave him much anxiety. To the last his sympa
thies were with the upholders of the Covenant, rather than
with their successors. Towards the close of his life he
suffered greatly from a most painful malady. His diary is full
of pious reflections, and he died in peace. His life-long op
position to Episcopacy arose in part, no doubt, from worldly
motives. It must be remembered, moreover, that there was
much truth in the arguments urged by him against the in
trusion of Bishops and clergy into civil offices. The persecu
tion of the non-conforming Presbyterians of Morayshire, by
the order of the State, involved the Bishop of the Diocese in
the matter, and admits of no justification. Alexander Brodie
of Brodie died on April 17th, 1680, and his son James suc
ceeded him in his estates. *
Bishop Murdoch Mackenzie, 1662.
Bishop Mackenzie was descended from a younger son of
the family of Gairloch, a chief branch of Seaforth. He was
bom in 1600, was a graduate of Aberdeen University, and
received his Orders from Bishop Maxwell of Ross. When
nominated to the See of Moray he was Incumbent of Elgin.
* The very day before his death Alexander Brodie commenced a short entry
in his Diary which his son continued from the date of his father's decease.

5p The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century.
¦The restoration of the Monarchy took place in x66o, and
two, years afterwards the Rev. Murdoch Mackenzie was
.appointed Bishop of Moray. If the Laird of Brodie had
but little favour for Mr. Mackenzie before the restoration
of Prelacy, it was still less probable that he would be
attracted to him after his elevation to the Episcopate.
Bishop Mackenzie appears to have kept up some state at
Elgin, and so did the Justice Depute. Mr. Brodie saw in
this the corruption of mankind. Bishop Mackenzie usually
acted with sound judgment, his kindly disposition making
him averse to enforcing the laws upon the non-conformists
of the Moray Diocese, who were at the time few and far
between. When Episcopacy was re-established in 1661 the change
was welcome to nearly the whole Diocese of Moray, the only
clerical recusants being the Rev. Thomas Urquhart, the
Rev. James Urquhart (of Kinloss), and the Rev. George
Meldrum of Glass, the latter of whom afterwards conformed
for a time. Among the laity those who were displeased at
the restoration of the Episcopate were few in number in
Morayshire. The Laird of Brodie stood almost alone in his
religious views on this question, finding little sympathy in
those around him. On October 24th, 1662, Brodie wrote as
foUows : — " I was dealt with to go with David to the Bishop,
and had much reluctancy. Let the Lord open my eyes and
enlighten my mind, and conform me by his grace, and let
me not be entangled through these occasions ... I heard
that the whole ministers had submitted and acknowledged
the Bishop at the Synod, except Mr. James and Mr. Thomas
Urquhart." Afterwards he inscribed in the Diary, — " I heard that
the Bishop had ministered the Communion kneeling, and
that all the people had gone along with him." In Feb., 1672,
Archbishop Leighton proposed that Bishop Mackenzie should
be sent to the Diocese of Orkney, an appointment then
superior to that of Moray in a worldly point of view.
Bishop Mackenzie's wife died on May 5th, 1676, and the
Laird was much disappointed because he was not called to-
the funeral.
While Mr. Brodie was quick to discern the inconsistency
of the appointment of Bishops and Clergy to civil offices he
failed to observe a similar incongruity when Presbyterian
ministers were sent to Holland with himself and the other
Commissioners to negociate the terms upon which the exiled
sovereign would accept the Scottish crown.

The Church at Keith in the Seventeenth Century. 5 1
Elsewhere in the Diary we learn that the Bishop, the Earl
of Moray, and Lord Duffus having been commissioned " to
censure and convene for conventicles," met at Forres. The
few non-conformists in the Diocese of Moray might well have
been passed over ; but it was in this way in other parts of the
country that the State brought the Prelates into disrepute
with the people.
Towards the close of Bishop Mackenzie's residence in the
Diocese of Moray, there was evidently a more friendly
feeling between the Laird and himself, so that when the for
mer was about to remove to Orkney, Mr Brodie ordered
some help to be sent to the Bishop for removing his belong
ings to the far North. The Bishop on his part called at Mr
Brodie's house to take leave before his departure to Kirkwall,
The Bishop, doubtless, was not without respect for the out
spoken personage, who did not profess with his lips what he
disapproved of in his heart.
Some years after Bishop Mackenzie removed to Orkney, a.
party of Presbyterian non-conformists were wrecked upon
those stormy shores. Those of them who escaped to land,.
were kindly treated by Bishop Mackenzie, and the Laird
was able to state in the Diary on Jan. 3, 1680 — " I heard
that the prisoners were ship-wrecked at Orkney, and most
of them drowned, and some land safe. Lord ! instruct me
by this providence, and grant me to take it up and lament
it aright. I heard Bishop Murdoch was kindly to them."
Bishop James Atkins, 1677.
This Bishop had a short Episcopate, being transferred to-
the Diocese of Galloway in 1679. He was much stricter
than his predecessor in carrying out the obnoxious laws
against the Presbyterian non-conformists, and on that ac
count was not in favour with the Laird of Brodie.
Bishop Colin F.4LC0nar, 1679.
The Laird favoured this Bishop more than either of his
two immediate predecessors in the See, having met him
some years before his consecration at a mineral well where
they had some friendly intercourse. Bishop Falconar was
active and zealous in the work of his Diocese, but the part
he was obliged to take in enforcing compliance with the un
popular and persecuting Test Act must have impaired his
influence with Mr. Brodie. Bishop Falconar died in 1686.

^be Cburcb at Ikeitb
IN THE
EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.

The ushering in ofthe eighteenth century found the Revolu
tion settlement consolidated and confirmed, though signs
were not wanting that all parties were not satisfied with the
arrangement. Civil and religious liberty had been won at
the cost of tremendous sacrifices, and it could not be sup
posed that the nation would lightly part with those priceless
treasures. In England, the Episcopal Church had wisely
cast in her lot with the reigning house ; she could not for
get that James 1 1., oblivious of oaths and promises to defend
her, had attempted to betray her dearest interests. The
adherents of the disestablished Episcopal Church of Scot
land were more numerous in the North of Scotland than
they were in the South, and the most of them were strongly
attached to the cause of the exiled family of Stuart. These
thought that a restoration of the exiled Prince to the throne
of his fathers was not impossible, and when the risings of
171 5 and 1745 took place, many of them were to be found in
the insurgent ranks. The following narrative will show how
disastrous an influence this mistaken course had upon the
Scottish Episcopal Church, for it brought down upon it the
vindictive measures of the Government. Far wiser would it
have been had bishops and clergy laid politics aside, and
-confined themselves to their spiritual duties.
It has been already mentioned in this history, that within
the Churchyard of Keith, there is still extant a part of the
pre-Revolution Church, and with an account of this the
narrative of the eighteenth century begins.
The fragment is a monument to the wife and several of
the children of the Rev. Sir James Strachan of Thornton,
the Episcopal Established clergyman of Keith in 1688. The

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 53,
foUowing is a translation of the Latin inscription — " Beneath
the seat of the Kinminnity family rest the ashes of a most
exceUent woman. Dame Katharine Rose, Lady of Thorn-
tone, whose most fragrant memory, although it has been
honoured abundantly and sufficiently by monuments more
enduring than any bronze, her sorrowing husband. Sir James
Strachan of Thorntone, the pastor of this church, has deemed
right to commemorate by this monument. . . . She died on
the 6th of April, in the year 1689. Here also rest WiUiam,.
Robert, and Joshua Strachan, their sons."
To Episcopalian ears this stone tells a tale of " dool and
sorrow." The wife of the Rev. Sir James Strachan died on
the 6th of April, i6Bg ; and on the 28th day of the same
month, all ministers ofthe Gospel north of the Tay were en
joined by the Convention of Estates assembled at Edin
burgh to pray for William and Mary as King and Queen of
Scotland, and to read a proclamation to that effect. The
ministers who refused to do this were deprived of their in
cumbencies. Sir James refused either to read the pro
clamation, or to pray for William and Mary ; and instead
of doing so, he prayed for the exiled monarch. King James,
and for his restoration to the throne of his fathers. For this
he was formally deprived of his charge, and thus in the same
month the pastor of Keith laid his wife in the grave, and was
bereft at once of his church and of his home.
At the time of the Revolution, William Hay was Bishop
of Moray. But a short while ago a marble tablet was
erected to the memory of this Bishop in one of the Western
Towers of St. Andrew's Cathedral, Inverness. This tablet
originally placed in the High Kirk of Inverness, 180 years
ago, tells of the piety of Bishop Hay. An ecclesiastical His
torian writing of this prelate says — "He is described as a
person of mild and gentle temper, who disapproved alike of
the penal laws against the Papists, and of the severe measures
against the Presbyterians. He died on the 9th of March,,
1707." It would have been well for our Church in .Scotland
if all the Bishops of that day had been like him. Like Sir ¦
James Strachan of Thorntone, most of them gave up their
all, out of loyalty to the house of Stuart. Those of them,
however, who approve of the hard measures resorted to
against the Covenanters, were therein disloyal to the King
of Kings, who said, "Love your enemies, bless them that
curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for thefn
which despitefuUy use you and persecute you."
After the death of Bishop Hay we do not read of another

54- The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
Bishop of Moray till the appointment of Bishop Dunbar to
the See in 1727. In 1689 the State had despoiled the Epis
copal Church of Scotland of its worldly goods and secular
^position. The State, however, had no power to rob that
Church of its spiritual rights or to make her less the Epis
copal Church of Scotland than she was before. In that sense
the State can neither make nor unmake a Church. Accord
ingly the disestablished Scottish Bishops of 1689 handed
down their office and authority to other prelates whom they
themselves consecrated, from whom again it has descended
to the Bishops of the Episcopal Church of Scotland at the
present day. In the troublous times that followed 1689 Bis
hops in Scotland were not consecrated to any particular See,
but they ruled the Church as a corporate or collegiate body,
and were on that account styled " CoUege Bishops." Their
chief duties were to transmit the Apostolic office to others as
their successors, and to ordain to the ministry ofthe Church.
In the years that were to come, the Episcopal Church, of
Scotland had to pass through the very furnace of affliction.
Though cast down she was not forsaken, and she was eventu-
aUy to emerge from those sufferings purer and far more
powerful than she was before. Troublous and dark days fol
lowed upon the disestablishment of 1689, and it will be seen
that the rhain cause of the reverses that happened to Epis
copacy in'Scotlatid during that time arose from the exagger
ated idea which Episcopalians of those days had concerning
hereditary right, and from their adhering nobly indeed, but
not wisely, to the falling cause ofthe Stuart family.
The Rev. Sir James Strachan.
The places of worship wherein Episcopalians assembled,
were styled by their accusers meeting-houses. Before long
the pastors of the persecuted Creed were forbidden to minis-'
ter to their flocks, even in their own humble sanctuaries. Sir
James Strachan ventured to return to preach to his own fol
lowers at Keith, and for so doing a severe sentence was pro
nounced upon him by the Scottish Privy Council. The fol
lowing extract from the " acta " of the Scottish Privy Coundl
has been taken from M.S. now in the General Registry House,
Edinburgh : —
1704. " Libel given by J, Blair against Sir James Strachan of
Thornton, some tyme Incumbent of the Kirk of Keith. Deprived
formerly by the Privy Council, ' has presumed to return and intrude
himself upon the said Paroch of Keith.' Not compeared. Ordered

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 55>..
¦* to be denounced Her Majestie's Rebell and put him to her Majes-
tie's horn, escheat and inbring all his moveable goods and gear to
her Majestie's use for his contempt and disobedience.' "
That this severe sentence was pronounced against Sir
James for preaching to his own flock is proved by the follow
ing extract taken from " the Presbytery Records of Strath
bogie." Keith, 23 Sep. 1703. "This day Mr. Gilchrist (the established
Presbyterian Minister of Keith) and Mr. Murray. . . . represented
that Sir James Strachan, late Incumbent at Keith, did set up a
meeting-house in that parish, and practises the breaking and devyd-
ing of both parishes and other nybouring congregations where Pres
byterian ministers were settled : the presbytery also being informed
that it was expedient to order a meeting at the Kirk of Keith which
Mr. Gilchrist earnestly pressed in respect that he found his visita
tion, especially in his ministerial capacity, thrust at by unaccount
able culumnies industriously spread by the said Sir James, his abet- :
tors within and without the parish, for the better advancing and sup
porting the schism."
A visitation was accordingly held at Keith soon after this,
and the foUowing objections against Mr Gilchrist were giVen
in by Charles Stewart, in the name of Sir Alex. Innes of Cox-
town and several other heritors, and "^jf^w^z-a//)/ of the haill
farishioners in the Parochure of Keith"
To the Reverend the Presbytery of Murray assembled at Keith.
" Primo — The Apostles' Creed is not repeated by him at the ad
ministration olthe Sacrament of Baptisme."
" 20. The Scriptures are not read in the Church before Divine
Service." " 30. The Doxologie is neither said nor sung."
"4to. The Lord's Prayer is not terminatively made use of."
"Sto, Baptisme is not administered but at such and such tymes
without consideration ofthe exigent ofthe infant."
"6to. The subscribers are not duly visited."
" 7to. The parishoners have not been catechised but once since '
his Incumbency."
"9no. He keeps his people in the Church that are to be married
from morning to evening." ¦
"Decimo — Contrar to Her Majestie's most gracious Letter toler
ating Meeting Houses, Mr. Gilchrist hath protested against pastore
aud people which tends to disturb Her Majestie, notwithstanding
they are tolerated and authorised in the most public places of this
Kingdome." " Sic. Sub."
Chas, Stewart for Sir Alex. Innes of Coxtone.

56 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.

Alex. Johnstoune.
Robert Imlach.
Gilbert Smith.
John Morison.
H. Robettsone.
Wm. Niven.
J. Eraser.

The narrative will now tell of the struggles of the Keith
Congregation.
Mr. Gilchrist answered these allegations, and considera
tion was delayed. Immediately after the statement of the
above circumstances, it is noted in the same Presbytery
Record — " Since Sir James Strachan did of late set up a
meeting-house at Keith, many of the people had withdrawn
from the Presbyterian ministry."
The Presbytery seem to have been somewhat helpless, as
most of the parishioners had evidently withdrawn to attend
Sir James Strachan's meeting house. They could only at
tempt to encourage those who had not so withdrawn. A
successful appeal, however, was made to the secular power,
as we learn from the afore-mentioned severe sentence pro
nounced against Sir James by the Scottish Privy Council
in 1704.
It would appear that the said meeting-house was at Allan-
buie. Sir James was interdicted by the Privy Council, but
the meeting house does not seem to have been interdicted ;
and the Episcopalians began to have their services read by
laymen, rather than have no service at aU. AUanbuie is
situated near the foot of Muldary Hill, and the members df
the Church attending the meeting-house could easily post
watches or sentinels, to prevent their being surprised by
their opponents when the services were in progress. A lay-
reader licensed by the Bishop at the present day would only
read such parts of the services as he should be licensed to
conduct. But the persecuted Episcopalian laymen of Keith,
having no option in the matter, read the service straight
through. This will be seen from the following entry in "the
Strathbogie Presbytery records : —
May, 1704. — "William Niven, factor of Muldarie, and precentor
in the meeting-house of AUanbuie. Contumacious, did take upon
himself to be precentor and reader in meeting-house for the public
worship of God ; and when no sermon is at the meeting-house,
draws the people there, where the said William, after reading several

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 57
chapters in the Holy Scriptures, and some prayers, dismisses them
with pronouncing the Apostolic blessing as is informed."
Called — compeared not.
" Referred to the Laird of Grant, and to stop service till charge
cleared." Mr. Gilchrist and his friends had silenced the minister of
the AUanbuie meeting-house by the aid of the secular arm,
but it does not appear that they also succeeded in silencing
the precentor at the same place. Most likely that function
ary continued to lead the psalmody, and sometimes to act as
lay-reader ss before.
Sir James Strachan died in 1715 at Inverness, as appears
from Dr. Gordon's Chronicles of Keith.
The Rev. George Strachan.
James Strachan was interdicted from preaching at AUan
buie, forthwith ; however, he sent his son George as his sub
stitute. The Presbytery Records refer to this in the following
words : —
29th June, 1704, — " Represented by Mr. Gilchrist to the Presby
tery that Mr. George Strachan, Schoolmaster at Huntly, and son to
Sir James Strachan, late Incumbent at Keith, had this last Lord's
Day taken upon him to preach in the meeting-house at AUanbuie,
where there had been no sermon for several preceding Sabbaths, the
said Sir James Strachan desisting from preaching at the said meet
ing-house, being prohibited and discharged by the Lords of her
Majestie's Privie Councell from preaching. The Presbytery taking
to their consideration how dangerous it is if such encroachments
upon the office of the ministry by persons taking upon them to
preach or invade the office of the ministry without any legall call
thereto, be tolerat, and likewise that the said Mr. George Strachan
had not subscribed the Confession of Faith as a Schoolmaster, as
the Confession of his Faith  "
ordered Mr Strachan to be summoned to give an account
of the authority by which he officiated.
On the iSthofJuly, 1704, the Presbytery of Strathbogie
met to receive any answer which the accused should be pre
pared to give them. That he did not appear nor recognise
the authority of the Presbytery is proved by another entry
in the same Record.
"George Strachan, called, compeared not; but Mr. John
Annand in Fochabers, and with him a great multitude of country
people, convocate from this and the two parishes of Bellie and
Grange, called by ane intimation att the meeting house ati Allan*
D I

58 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
buie, the last Lord's Day immediately after the said Mr George
Strachan his preaching there."
Annand was objected to as appearing, but allowed to give
in a paper which was an absolute declinature by George
Strachan of the jurisdiction of the Presbytery, and a refusal
to give any account how or by whom he was authorised to
officiate. The Presbytery further decided that the Duke of
Gordon was to be informed of Mr John Strachan.
The Presbytery met again on the ist of February, 1705,
and George Strachan was, by a letter from the Lord Advo
cate, " discharged " from preaching in the parish of Keith.
It seems also that Mr. Strachan had again preached at
AUanbuie on an " alleged pretended call " from Coxtown and
others. The following incident reveals some rather sharp practice
on the part of Mr. Gilchrist and his colleagues, amusing
enotigh to us at the present day : —
" It was represented that John Fraser in Cooperhill had convo-
cated severall people that used to keep the meeting-house on the
Lord's Day, and had set up one Alex. Johnstoune, a maltman, to
read the English service there, since now the late intruders were
discharged to preach in that parish, and that the said Alex. John
stoune publickly prayed for persons dead.
The Presbytery ordered Alex. Johnstoune to be cited.
On March 8th, 1705, the Presbytery met. Alex. John
stoune, the offending maltman, appeared. As to prayers for
the dead he " explained there were some petitions for persons
that were dead, viz.. King Charles, Prince Charlie" (afterwards
Charles II.) and others, and he excused himself, "as it was
so in the book that was put into his hand."
Alex. Johnstoune was sharply rebuked by the Presbytery.
The book that Alex. Johnstoune had read the prayers from,
was in all probability the Scottish Service Book of 1637.
The following excerpt from M.S. " Acta '' * of the Scottish
Privy Council in the General Registry House, Edinburgh,
shows how the Strathbogie Presbytery called in the aid of
the civil power, to prevent the Rev. George Strachan from
exercising his ministerial office : —
1705. — Libel or letters of complaint by J. Blair to Council against
*The author begs to acknowledge that he received the extracts from the
"Acta" of the Scottish Privy Council, and from the Strathbogie Presbytery
Records of the i8th century, from the Rev. J. B. Craven of Kirkwall. On tlie
other hand Mr. Craven received from the writer the extracts from the Keith
Session Records.

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 59
Mr. George Strachan, Schoolmaster at Huntlie alleadged Deaconat
by the exauctorat Bishops . . . who hath, of late, intruded himself
into the Parish of Keith, and set up for a preacher therein, and
exercises all the other parts of the ministerial! function ....
" compeared with Mr. Robert Forbes, his advocate."
" Admitted what was alleadged and preached to such persons as-
came there for hearing of the Word, which he thought could not be
the ground of a complaint, wherewith to trouble the Lords of Her
Majestie's Most Honourable Privy Council, especially as the
Defender is qualified by law by taking the oath of alleadgiance and
signing the assurance." He added that "he did not intrude to
Church or Manse, but preached only in a private house within the
Parochure." Notwithstanding this defence the libel was received, con
sidered by Council and the following order given — •
" They have prohibited and discharged, and hereby prohibit and
discharge the said Mr, George Strachan, defender, to preach or exer
cise any pairt of the minesteriall function within the Parish of Keith,
under the paine of being banished out of the Shyre of Banff, within
which the said parish lies, if he transgress on the premises."
This sentence appears to have given great dissatisfaction
at Keith, and some of the people retaliated by annoying the
persecutors of Mr. Strachan. The " Acta" relate the circum
stances ofthe case.
1706. — "J. Strachan" (probably meaning George Strachan, or
some other son of James Strachan's) "diaconat by Late Bishop of
Murray, . . . supported by Papists, and though deprived yet he did
exercise the ministerial! function on the borders of [Keith] and other
parishes, sometimes in the fields and sometimes in the houses, and
hath got such a following of loose and dissolute persons wherof
several are Papists that they espouse his quarrel to that height and
insult almost the whole ministers of the Presbyterie attacking some
of them with gun and pistols, as they ride out on the highway, and
invading others of them in their houses, with swords, and other
weapons declaring openly that they practise these violences on Mr.
Strachar.'s account."
The Episcopalians kept up their meetings, until the State
authorities stepped in and closed the place of worship at
AUanbuie — for we find the following in the same Privy
Council, M.S. — 1706.
'"Mr. Robert Caddel (Calder likely) a man well-known for his
dissatisfaction to the Government and for the troubles and disorders
he hath occassioned in several parts, and one Mr. Alexander Gad-
derer hath set up a meeting house in the Parish of Keith,"
1706. — The Sheriff was ordered to take steps for shutting
up the meeting house at Keith and the neighbourhood thereof. e

6o The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
Before taking leave of the Strachan family in this narrative
it should be mentioned that the Rev. George Strachan was
again indicted for setting up a meeting house in 1709, but
the " Acta " state that
" The Lords Commissioners of Justiciary in respect that the
pannell denys the Lybell, and that the pursuer owns there were no
witnesses, they desert the dyet against the said Mr. George Strachan,
and ordain him to be dismissed from the Bar, '
John Erskine, I. P. D.
Sir James Strachan had another son, the Rev. Arthur
Strachan, and in 1707 Mr. Gilchrist of Keith represented that
he had been carrying on irregular practices in baptising and
marrying in the neighbourhood of Keith. In 1708 this same
clergyman is charged with committing the like irregularity
at Mortlach.
William III. died in 1702, the exiled Sovereign having pre
deceased him in 1701. The accession of William to the
throne, under the Providence of God, vindicated the prin
ciples of constitutional government and guaranteed civil and
ecclesiastical freedom. In Scotland, the memory of the
" Deliverer" as his supporters delighted to call the Prince of
Orange, is stained with the Massacre of Glencoe and ihe
execution of Thomas Aikenhead at Edinburgh for heresy, in
1696 ; though it is not clear in how far the king was himself
to blame for either of these events ; indeed there is reason
to believe thM personally he was averse to persecution. In
1702, William was succeeded on the throne by Anne the
daughter of James II,
On the accession of Anne, the disestablished Bishops then
surviving, recognised the necessity of consecrating others to
the Episcopate, to preserve the succession of the Scottish
Church, The Rev. John Sage and the Rev. John FuUarton
were accordingly consecrated Bishops at Edinburgh by the
Archbishops of Glasgow and the Bishops of Edinburgh and
Dunblane. Other consecrations took place in 1709, when
the Rev. John Falconer and the Rev. Henry Christie were
consecrated at Dundee. The Rev. James Gadderar was
added to the Episcopate in 1712.
In i7ii,the Rev. James Greenshields who had been im
prisoned by order of the Edinburgh Presbytery for readin"
the English Service Book in an Episcopal meeting house a^t
Edinburgh, .carried his case to the House of Lords, and
triumphed over his opponents. The Act of Toleration was
passed in the following year by Parliament, declaring it to be

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 6i
" free and lawful for all those of the Episcopal Communion
in that part of Great Britain caUed Scotland, to meet and
assemble for the exercise of divine worship, to be performed
after their own manner by pastors ordained by a Protestant
Bishop, and who are not established ministers of any Church
or parish, and to use in their congregations the Liturgy of
the Church of England, if they think fit, without any let,
hindrance or disturbance from any person whatever"; and
the Act of 1695 against irregular baptisms and marriages was
at the same time repealed. On the other hand, the Episcopal
clergy were required to take the oaths of allegiance and abjur
ation, and in the course of divine service to pray for the
Queen's JIajesty, the Princess Sophia of Hanover and all
ttie Royal Family. This Act was certainly reasonable and
fair, though many of the Episcopal clergy by their faithful
adherence to the exiled house were prevented from taking
advantage of its provisions. Queen Anne died in 1714 and
was succeeded by the Elector of Hanover under the title of
George I.
On the 22nd of May, 1706, it was reported to the Pres
bytery of Strathbogie by the Established Minister of Keith,
" that the Sheriff upon ane particular Act of Councell ordain
ing the shutting up of the meeting-house there, had intimat
the said Act to be intruded, and that there had been no
trouble in that parish these two last Lord's days." This
report from Mr. Gilchrist arose from an application which
had been made to the Sheriff in the previous month, to stop
the ministrations of the Rev. James Sibbald, another Episco
pal clergyman, who now appeared on the scene. Mr. Sibbald
had been ordained Deacon by the Bishop of Dunblane. The
following entry in Strathbogie Presbytery Record sufficiently
explains the report above referred to : —
April 16, 1786. — "The Brethren applied to the Sheriff to put the
proclamation in execution anent Mr. Sibbald, intruder at Keith, the
Sheriff having called for the said Mr. Sibbald, and he, refusing to
compear before him if any ofthe ministers were present, but would
wait on the Sheriff at any house in the town by himself, the Sheriff
appointed with the Presbytery that he would send to them whatever
document Mr. Sibbald should produce as authorising him to preach,
and accordingly did send a License dated the 6th of May,
1686, by the then pretended Bishop of Dunblain, licensing the said
Mr. .Sibbald to preach, the said Mr. Sibbald also alledging to the
Sheriff as the Presbytery were informed that he was Diaconat by the
said Bishop in the same year, and he had qualified himself according
to law, though he had not the intimation thereof to produce all upon
which the said Mr, Sibbald alledged himself not to be comprehended

62 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
in the late proclamation ; but the Presbytery, finding by the words
of the said proclamation as they conceived the said Mr. Sibbald
to be therein comprehended, did require the Sheriff to put the said
proclamation in execution as to the parish of Keith under form of
Instrument." The Sheriff promised his help, but asked time to consider
if Mr. Sibbald were really " comprehended."
Mr, Gilchrist was mistaken in thinking that his action had
silenced Mr. Sibbald, for in 1709 we find it stated to the
Presbyterian Synod of Moray, —
" That Mr. James Sibbald, schismaticall preacher at Keith, was-
cited before the Lords Justiciary in their Circuit at Aberdeen, and
that he is now under process,"
In the year 171.5 the Jacobite standard was raised by the
Earl of Mar in favour of the exiled Prince of Wales, or, as he
was called by his adherents, James VIII. of Scotland. The
Earl of Mar had neither energy nor military skill, and was
by no means well qualified to be the leader of such an enter
prise. The Duke of Argyll commanded the opposing forces,
and a battle of doubtful result was fought at Sheriffmuir near
Dunblane, in which neither side could claim the victory..
After this the exiled Prince landed at Peterhead. His pre
sence did not however inspire his soldiers with confidence,
and in the course of a short time his army melted away and
the enterprise collapsed. The Earl of Huntly had raised a
contingent for the forces of Mar, and on their way to join
these. Lord Huntly's soldiers marched through the town of
Keith. The Established Church of Keith was taken posses
sion of by the Jacobites, and the Rev. James Sibbald, Epis
copal clergyman of AUanbuie, was installed therein. At that
time the Session Clerk of Keith was Mr. John Skinner, a
most worthy man. According to his own statement he was
somewhat harshly treated by the Jacobites, and his school
was scattered. He appears however to have been rather fright
ened than hurt. The story of Sheriffmuir is best told in Mr.
Skinner's own words which the writer was kindly allowed
to transcribe from the Keith Session Records of the period.
Keith, Oct. 2, 1715. — " At this time the country was all in a con
sternation. No safety was, to go out or in. For this day the Earl
of Huntly began his march to the Rebells' army with his calvalcade
of horse ; the foot being to march to-morrow. This day immedi
ately after sermon the writer, Mr. John Skinner, was seized and
made prisoner by a party of Achynachy's men as was pretended by
the Earl of Huntly's order to be carried along with him, and very
harshly dealt with and the school much broken."
" This day, Nov. 13, 1715, the Rebells having marched from-

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 63
Perth where they had lyen about 5 or 6 weeks, were met by the
Duke of Argyle with only about 3000 men, whereas the RebeUs
were 15000 strong upon Sheriffmuir near Dunblain where about 2
o'clock afternoon they had a hot engagement, and great numbers
killed on both sides as we were soon informed by the numerous run
aways." Dec. 18, 1715. — " This day the Earl of Huntly immediately after
sermon passed through Keith on his return, very disheartened like.
Upon Thursday being the 22nd this week about 56 or more of the
Strathdone Rebells headed by black Joke alias John Forbess and
Scallater Forbess came and l.ty in the town about a week where they
committed unheard of robliery, robbed the school-chamber and car-
ryed off many things, as did afterwards about the beginning of the
year wild men who were also monsters of wickedness."
" From the 18th of Dec. 1715 tc the 24th of Feb. 1716 there was
no peace to go out or in by reason of many troubles and the marches
and countermarches of the Rebells and likewise Jacobites in the
Parish, and with the said thieviish garrison they put in the scandal
ous trumpeter of Rebellion Mr. James Sibbald into the Church and
any small collections which were gathered at the meetings where the
minister preached in his house or the school were given to the most
indigent poor. Thus this year ended and the next began with
abundance of trouble, robberie and oppression, &c."
February 12, 1716 — " Upon Thursday night, the 9th, this week,
there were rebels consisting of about 4000 quartered in this parish,
and did a world of mischief by robbing, plundering, as they were
flying from the brave Duke of Argyll and King George's army."
February 19, 1716. — "At this lime the King's forces having come
up, our Jacobite party became calm, and our meeting-house was
given up. Mr. Sibbald being loathed by his hearers, thought fit to
retire." After the failure of the rising of 171 5, the more prominent
leaders of that enterprise had to flee for their lives, and there
can be little doubt that the Rev. James Sibbald followed their
example. His hearers had probably given him a hint to this
effect, with a view to their own safety, they themselves con
forming for the time to the Presbyterian services. This may
be inferred from another entry in the Kirk Session Records
already quoted, stating that on April 1st, 1717, a meeting of
the heritors was called to consider about means "' for repair
ing the common loft, the Kirk now being throng, since the
meeting-house gave up." AU the Episcopal laity at Keith
were not, however, to escape punishment at the hands of
their adversaries. The crime of aiding and abetting the Rev.
James Sibbald and accepting his ministrations was not to be
overlooked. He had baptised a child at a house near Bir-
kenburn, which stands at the foot of the Balloch Hill. For

64 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
this both the father of the child and the witnesses were sent
to prison. The chUd had been baptised by the parent's "ain
minister," and he was a Jacobite. The original Record tells
the tale of their offence, political and ecclesiastical.
April, 25, 1716. — "This day tbe persons following having been
called before the session, were called and compeared, viz., John
Hutchon near Achynay, parent of the child, Robert Wat and
James Morison the witness, Henry Palmer, near Birkenburn, in
whose house the pretended baptism was administered. The persons
being brought before the session were que.stioned for receiving
ordinances from the hands of Mr. James Sibbald, late preacher at
the meeting-house in this Parish. They having been rebuked, any
other censure was delayed till further consideration, and they referr
ed to the civil magistrate. And Thomas Grant of Achynany one
of the Deputy Leutenants ofthe Shire being present, ordered them
to be conveyed from our bar to the prison as contraveners of the
established laws in keeping company with an open and avowed
rebell and one so monstrously scandalous as the said Mr. Sibbald
was known to be. " Closed with prayer."
We cannot read the foregoing extracts without feeling
thankful for the altered times in which we live. There is a
very different state of matters now in Keith. Presbyterians
and Episcopalians know how to live and work peacefully to
gether side by side. A few years ago when the new Epis
copal Church was built, generous help was given to that work
by Presbyterians of all denominations in the town. Neither
they nor we are to blame for the mistakes and follies of our
forefathers in former generations. The Episcopal clergy of
the time cannot escape censure for involving their Church
in political controversy and for their complete subserviency
to the exiled Court at St. Germains. This part ofthe subject,
however, will be taken up further on.
The Episcopal Church at Keith from 1715 to 1745.
Severe measures were taken against the Episcopalians
after the rebellion. In 1719 it was enacted. "That no per
sons should be permitted toofificiate in any Episcopal meet
ing-house or congregation, where nine or more persons were
present, in addition to the members of the household, with
out praying in express words for King George and the royal
family, and without having taken and subscribed the oath
of abjuration contained in the statute, under the penalty of
six months' imprisonment, and of having his meeting-house
shut up for the same period." It was not until the summer

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 65
of 1719 that the Jacobite rising, commenced four years
previously, received ihe coup de grace. The final dispersion
of the Chevalier's forces, and the capture of the auxiliary
Spaniards at Glenshiell, to the number of 400, took place on
the loth of June.
Even yet the Episcopal clergy refused to regard the restor
ation of the ancient line a political impossibility. Not that
there was much to admire in the first representatives of the
House of Hanover. Towards the first of the four Georges,
the hater of "bainting and boetry," the "Wee, wee, German
lairdie " of Jacobite minstrelsy, it was not to be expected that
much loyalty could be felt, even by those who were least
blind to the faults of his predecessors. Still, the Electors of
Hanover were now Kings of Great Britain, de facto, and it
might have been supposed that the clergy, at all events,
would be guided by the maxim — " The powers that be, are
ordained of God."
The vengeance of the Presbytery, as a matter of course,
overtook the Rev. James Sibbald, and was given effect to as
soon as the failure of the enterprise with which he had
associated himself, was fully apparent. Sentence of deposi
tion was passed in due form upon the "late preacher at the
meeting-house . . . for his forsaking the Protestant religion,
and other gross scandals."
The two Episcopal clergymen who next came into pro
minence in the district, were the Rev. Adam Harper, and
the Rev. WiUiam Harper, his son.
At the time of the Revolution the first of these was the
Established Minister of Boharm. After the rising of 1715
he resigned and opened an Episcopal meeting-house at
Cairnwhelp, in the parish of Cairnie. Mr. Harper's defection
was followed by the usual legal proceedings. The action of
the Strathbogie Presbytery appears from the subjoined ex
tract from their Records : —
June 8, 1720. — "Anent Mr. Harper in Cairnwhelp, the Presby
tery taking this affair under consideration with Mr. Lewis Gordon
at Huntly and Mr. Harper at Gordon Castle, do agree that there be
letters written to the Sheriffs of Aberdeen and Banff informing them
of these men their illegal and irregular proceedures. Moderator
appointed to write and if Sheriff fail, to seek redress from others."
The form of service used in the Episcopal meeting-houses
at this date, differed but little from the Presbyterian type.
An extract cited by the Rev. J. B. Craven from an MS. in the
Episcopal archives at Edinburgh, adverts to certain clergy
who would not use the Liturgy.

66 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
" One of these (says the MS.) was the Rev. Mr. Adam Plarper at
Cairwhelp, who lived some years after Dr. Rose, and his congrega
tion were so wedded to what they called the good old way that it
cost no little pains to get the Liturgy introduced among them."
Not merely were the services of the "meeting-house " but
little removed in character from those of the Established
Church, but the outward appearance ofthe Episcopal clergy,
even when engaged in their ministerial functions had nothing
distinctive about it. Their attire during service consisted
usually of black gown, wig, and bands, the use of the surplice
having been revived in comparatively recent times.
A portrait ofthe Rev. William Harper exists in the British
Museum. Judging frpm this he must have been a gentle
and kindly man. Though not without influential friends he
too suffered for his adherence to the faith. In 1721 he was
brought before a circuit court at Inverness, for officiating as
an Episcopal clergyman. The charge was not sustained
owing to an irregularity in the indictment. The Justiciary
Records contain the following reference to the matter : —
Inverness, May 2, 1821. — "Mr. William Harper, son to Mr
Adam Harper in Cairnwhelp indicated and accepted as guilty of the
crime of exercising the function of a pastor in ane Episcopal meeting
house or congregation and other offence committed by him in
manner mentioned in his indictment.
" Prov. in defence —
" Mr, John Horn, Advocate, who alleges citation defective,
because designed as son to Mr. Adam Harper in Cairnwhelp which
lyes within the shire of Aberdeen and only edictally cited and not
at his alleged house in Fochabers."
Mr. Harper was at this time the only Episcopal clergy
man in the districts around Keith and Fochabers, and when
it is remembered that the penal laws of the time forbade him
to preach to more than nine persons in addition to the house
hold, it will be seen that his work was of a very laborious
kind. He would be compelled to preach and read the service
many times every Sunday to overtake his work. Mr. Harper
was an ardent Jacobite, as well as an active and laborious
clergyman. Such a zealous man could not escape the notice
of the Presbyterian authorities. He lived mostly at Gordon
Castle; and he was probably indebted to this fact, and to
the esteem in which he was held by the Earl of Huntly, for
a certain amount of protection from the attacks ofhis enemies.
Children were taken to Mr. Harper from all quarters to be
baptised ; and when his accusers failed in their attempts to
punish the shepherd, they brought forward for trial the

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 67
poorer members ofhis flock. It was a common practice to
associate some other charge along with that of baptism by
an Episcopal clergyman. Such a proceeding would be at
once disallowed by a jury in the present day ; and many of
these auxiliary indictments were frivolous in the extreme. In
the Keith Mission Records of March 3rd, 1723, James
Duncan is reported as having been seriously dealt with for
'¦'¦ having his child baptised by Mr. Harper, which the said
Mr. Harper now denys. The said Duncan admitted that
Air, Harper did baptise his child, ' but asserted his innocency
of the secondary charge made against him. The matter was
delayed "till the minister got the mind ofthe Presbytery."
The charges against this poor Episcopalian were held over
his head for a whole year. In a meeting of the Kirk Session
¦of Keith, held on March 15th, 1724, James Duncan was in
terrogated regarding the fault laid to his charge, and con
cerning " his going to Mr. Harper, a non-jurant preacher at
Gordon Castle, to get his child baptised." The accused
was cited to appear before " the Presbytery of Strathbogie at
Keith, the first Wednesday of April next to come."* The
foUowing extract from the same Record refers to a similar
offence. Sept. 22, 1723 — ** This day James Ord being called, compeared
and was sessionally rebuked for not producing his testimony — and
going to Mr. Harper a disaffected preacher, to get baptism for his
child after appointing to come here and keeping the minister waiting
n whole day. The minister reported he had now got a testimony of
the said Ord."
William Harper subsequently left the Diocese of Moray,
and became the Incumbent of a Church at Edinburgh. In
1739 he was appointed by the Edinburgh clergy chairman of
a meeting summoned for the purpose of applying for a man
date to elect a Bishop. His labours among the poor Episco
palians of Cairnie, Keith, and Fochabers, in the time of the
penal laws of George I. should never be forgotten. Mr.
Harper in June 1741 married Katherine, eldest daughter of
Sir David Thriepland of Fingask, widow of Mr. John Drum
mond of Pitcoy of the parish of St. Madoc's in the Carse of
Gowrie. The lady died in 1764, there having been no child
ren by either marriage.
Mr. Harper was a man of respectable talents. He wro'e
an able book which was published in Edinburgh in 1752
* These words are transcribed from the Keith Kirk Session Record of the
time.

68 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
under the title of "A Treatise on Infallibility" : showing that
the claims of the Church of Rome to that high privilege were
without foundation in Scripture, Antiquity or Reason, This
book was written in answer to a paper on that subject put
forth by a Popish Missionary. On the title page of the book
is added, "By a Presbyter of the Suffering Church of Scot
land," It is interesting to remark that the publisher was
" W. Gordon," doubtless the same bibliopole who assisted in
the escape of Sir Stuart Thriepland from Culloden, Sir
Stuart Thriepland was n. half-brother of Mrs. Harper.
In 1725 Gadderar, Bishop of Aberdeen, was formally elect
ed Bishop of Moray by the clergy of that Diocese assembled
in the fair city of Elgin. Among the names of those who
thus petitioned to be included within his Episcopal jurisdic
tion was William Milne, Muir of Keith. This was, no doubt,
the Episcopal clergyman who was then officiating at Rosarie,
a place about two miles distant from Keith, and not far from
AUanbuie. When the AUanbuie mission-house was closed
a substitute was opened at Rosarie. Gadderar's election to
the Episcopate of Moray was not confirmed by the College
of Bishops, and the See remained without a chief shepherd
till the election of Bishop William Dupbar in 1727.
The Strathbogie Presbytery Records, already so frequently
quoted, state that in 1732 there were "in Botriphnie some
Popish and a Jacobite meeting-house where Mr. Alexander
Cheyne officiates." Mr. Cheyne was the Episcopal clergyman
at Huntly. The same Records state that in 1726 there was
in the Parish of Cairney "a Jacobite meeting-house 
wherein is worship publickly every Lord's Day." From this,
no doubt, eventually developed the congregation ministered
to by Mr. Christie at Ruthven further on in the century.
The Rev. Dr. Gordon, in his " Chronicles of Keith," quot
ing from " Macfarlane's Geographical Collections for Scot
land," in which there is a description of the Parish of
Keith in Banffshire, in 1742, says^"Two miles west by
south from the Church is the House of Achanacie, now
possest by the widow of one Cadie Mitchell. A quarter of
a mile westward from the house, is a large Episcopal
meeting-house, at a place called Rosarie, where the min
ister has a very great auditory. This is the most westward
place of the Parish. A short mile north from Achanacie,
and two miles west from the Church, lies the ruinous House
of AUanbuie ; a little above which is the House of Muldarie
where the Episcopal minister used to live."

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 69
In 1727 the succession devolved to the second sovereign
of the House of Hanover. The penal laws against the
Episcopal Church remained the same ; but as appears, for
instance, from the statement regarding " the very great
auditory " at Rosarie they were not always strictly en
forced. Before proceeding to speak of the events of 1745, a
word or two about the Bishops of Moray at this time,
within whose Diocese Keith is situated, may not be out
of place. During the time ofthe earlier " College Bishops "
no particular See was assigned to any individual Prelate,
an anomaly which at last terminated in the restoration ofthe
Diocesan Episcopate.
In December, 1731, an agreement was come to in virtue of
v/hich the Diocese of Moray and Ross was formally assigned
to Bishop Dunbar. This Prelate was elected Bishop of
Aberdeen in 1733 ; and in 1735, having accepted the office,
he resigned the See of Moray and Ross. The choice
of the clergy of the vacated Diocese fell upon George Hay, a
Presbyter ofthe Diocese, to succeed Bishop Dunbar in 1737,
but he died at the end of the same year. In November,
1742, William Falconer, Bishop of Caithness and Orkney,
was elected to the See of Moray, and accepted of the charge.
The " College Bishops " kept up the Episcopal succession
during a most unsettled period ; but there can be no doubt
that the political course adopted by them was, from a worldly
point of view, a most mistaken one. In matters ecclesiasti
cal the final appeal with them was to the Crown, and not to
the Bishops of the Church in Synod assembled ; they were
Jacobities first, and Overseers of the Church of God after
wards. Agents from the Court of the Chevalier at St. Ger
main's transmitted orders to them which they obeyed. Emis
saries from the same quarter kept alive, no doubt, the spirit
of disaffection in the congregations of AUanbuie and Rosarie.
The refusal of the Episcopal clergy of Keith to admit to the
Liturgy the name of the reigning Sovereign, as that ofthe
King de facto accepted by the nation, furnished the weapon
pointed against themselves that enabled Mr. Gilchrist and
his colleagues to bring down upon them the crushing weight
of the civil power. Had the clergy of our Church seen their
way to accept the new political order, the Toleration Act of
Queen Anne would have amply protected them, and they
could have set up their place of worship next door to the
Parish Church at Keith, if they so had wished it, instead of
holding their services at AUanbuie and Rosarie. But while

70 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
we lament the results that attended a political error, as we
may regard it, let us not blame our predecessors too much.
They were implicitly acting up to the dictates of their con
science, and they were acting nobly in doing so. Steadfast
faithfulness to a drooping cause is a virtue in this world but
seldom met with. The piety and patient endurance of the
poverty-stricken Non-jurors will convey to coming genera
tions a lesson which the possession of the richest endowments
could never teach.
" 1745." — The events of 1745 had a most important bearing
upon the fortunes of the ancient Church of Scotland. The
news spread like wild-fire, " Our Prince is landed in Moidart
Bay," and in a marvellously short time the Episcopal congre
gations in the North were elert with new born confidence
and joy. The landing of the elder Chevalier in 171 5 had
imparted no confidence in his followers ; the coming of his
son, Charles Edward, the Bonnie Prince Charlie of the
wearers of the white cockade, had an effect widely different.
The hearts alike of Celt and Southron were touched at the
sight ofthe Prince who had come to win back his father's
throne. Their hopes rose high when the youthful leader, in
possession of Edinburgh and domiciled in Holyrood, the
heir of a hundred kings, defeated the Hanoverian troops at
Prestonpans, and thereafter penetrated beyond the English
border as far as Derby. Jealousy and distrust were
now, alas ! to mar the day. Much valuable time had
been wasted en route, anci though in England no op
position had been encountered during the march, there
was still an entire lack of that active sympathy which had
been confidently counted upon by the leaders of the expedi
tion. In a fatal hour the retreat from Derby was resolved
upon. The cause from that moment was doomed. On came
the Duke of Cumberland with his squadrons fresh from
Dettingen and Fontenoy, an alien host, eager to win with
fire and sword fresh laurels torn from Scottish soil.
At Keith it was that the last gleam of success shone upon
the Jacobite arms. The soldiers of Prince Charles advanced
from Fochabers, the cavalry leading the way and the foot-
soldiers following. When within two miles of Keith they
made a detour to the east, and finally reached the Huntly
road to the south-east of the town. The darkness of the
night and the misty condition of the atmosphere favoured
the manoeuvre. It is evident too that the Prince's men
vvere guided by some who were well acquainted with the
roads and by-roads of the district, in all probability by

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 7 1
members of the Rosarie Episcopal congregation serving in
the insurgent ranks.
Cumberland's men, consisting of 70 Campbells and 30 of
Kingston's troopers, were easily surprised in their rear.
Most of them were located in the Established Church which
then stood in the church-yard, and some were, in the school-
house. Soon after the mid-night hour, the resting place
of the dead was stirred with unwonted sounds. From the
Prince's men arose the loud huzza and the shout, " God save
Prince Charles I " Then following upon the report of their
muskets came the answer belched forth from the Church win
dows in smoke and flame, and anon the air was rent with the
cries of the wounded, and the groans of the dying. Victorious
in the church-yard the soldiers of the Prince went to aid their
comrades who were fighting in the street, and there also they
were successful. Major Glasgow and Captain Stewart, the
Prince's officers, were informed that more of Cumberland's
troops were on the way to Keith. There being no time to
lose, the prisoners to the number of about 80, besides 20 or 30^
captured horses were led in triumph to Fochabers. Time
lacked even to bury the dead, and the slain Campbells wrapped
in all likelihood in their tartan plaids and with " neither sheet
nor shroud " around them, were interred by strangers in the
Keith church-yard, far from the homesteads of Argyll. A
cavity at the picturesque old bridge of Keith, where some of
the Hanoverian clansmen took refuge, is called to this day the
Campbells' Hole.
Culloden or Drummossie Muir saw the extinction in blood
of the star of the young Chevalier. In the arrangement of
the Highland army traditional rights had been violated. The-
claifn of the Macdonalds to the place of honour on the right
wing had been overlooked. At the critical moment they
refused to charge, and standing in their places were shot down
like "driven deer." The treatment of the vanquished that
supervened upon the victory will ever brand with infamy
the victor's name. Wholesale massacres of prisoners were
perpetrated ; and gangs of brave but unfortunate men were
slaughtered in cold blood. A chivalrous race was for the time
being crushed and trampled upon, a race whose descendants
were ere long to do and dare right nobly for Britain's weal at
Quebeck and Waterloo, at Inkerman and Lucknow. Even
the Southern stranger can hardly gaze without emotion on
that battlefield, where the green patches among the heather
mark the graves of the departed brave ; and as he gazes at
these, he shudders at the name of " the Butcher " Cumberland..

72 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
How intensely Jacobite was the district about Keith add
Buckie, may be known from the fact that the famous Jacobite
song " Lewis Gordon" is supposed to have been composed
in 1874, by a Roman Catholic priest named Geddes, residing
in the Enzie. The equisite pathos of the first verse appeals
to every Scottish heart — ,
"Oh ! send Lewie Gordon hame,*
And the lad I daurna name ;
Tho' his back be at the wa'.
Here's to him that's far awa ! "
There is a tradition, which is no doubt perfectly truthful,
that some members ofthe Episcopal Church at Rosarie were
with the Prince's army at Culloden. The story was told to the
writer of these pages by a venerable member of the Epis
copal Church at Keith who died a few years ago. This
saintly old man was wont to relate the particulars received
originally from his grandfather, and which were to the fol
lowing effect : — After Culloden, fugitives belonging to the
neighbourhood arrived in Keith, closely followed by Hano
verian soldiers. Hastily stowing away their arms in the
thatch of the cottages they fled to the hills. Though for
the time safe from pursuit, there was much reason to fear that
those in hiding, even if they escaped the enemy, would die
for want of food. The shrewdness of a woman living in a farm
house at the top of the hill averted the catastrophe. She
baked oatmeal cakes in great plenty and distributed them
with impartial liberality among the soldiers and members of
her own household. To secure more than his own share was,
as may be imagined, no difficult matter to one with friendly
intentions. Having done so, the booty was conveyed
under cover of night to provision those who had found refuge
among the hills. After a time the soldiers left, and the fugi
tives returned to their homes.t
The Church at Rosarie was probably burned or destroyed
by Cumberland's soldiers at this time. On the way to Cul
loden the Duke had burned the Episcopal Church at Arradoul
near Buckie, and it is not likely that being in the vicinity, the
• Lord Lewis Gordon, younger brother of the then Duke of Gordon, had
joined the Prince's army.
t The aged EpLscopalian whose authority we have cited was present when the
foundation stone of the new_ church was laid in 1882. He did not however live
to see it consecrated. Lookint: ov^r the hedge one day at the progress of the
building operations he said, " I went to church first in my grandfather's hand,
and then in my father's hand, and I am pleased to see the walls of the new
Church rising there." "But oh!" he added, "I shall never be in it." "IThis
pre.sentinient proved sadly true, for he was taken away to the Church above, to
be for ever with his Lord, only a few months before the consecration of the new
edihce.

The Church at Keith in ihe Eighteenth Century. 73
soldiers would spare the place of worship at Rosarie. At all
events, there is no record of services there after 1745.
Severe repressive measures against Episcopalians were
adopted after 1715, but still heavier disabilities were imposed
by Statutes passed subsequently to 1745. The ministers ofthe
Church were now forbidden to officiate to more than five
people at a time, including the household. Those who con
travened this Statute were " for the first offence to be im
prisoned for six months, and for the second or any subsequent
offence to be transported to the plantations in America for
life ; and if they returned to Great Britain after such sen
tence, were to be imprisoned for life." The Episcopalian
laity also were to be punished in terms of the same enact
ment for attending their own places of worship. For the
first offence they were to be fined ^5, and for the second or
any subsequent offence, they were to be imprisoned for two
years. Penalties for contraventions of the law were im
posed upon peers, public officials, and other dignitaries.
Episcopacy in Scotland was to be destroyed root and
branch. To uproot a religion proved, as might have been
expected, an impossible task. The night of adversity
had closed in, dark and gloomy, and no star of hope for
the persecuted Communion was visible in the firmament.
Still the longest lane has its turning, and the darkest night
must end at last. Man's extremity is always God's oppor
tunity, and the Good Shepherd had a great work in store for
the Episcopal Church in Scotland, not only at home, but far
over the Western main. From Scotland, the wastes of
Southern Africa, and the remotest tribes of India were to re
ceive the Gospel light. The days were to come when the
laws that in 1746 and 1748 disgraced the British Statute
Book were to be torn ignominiously from its pages.
George II. died in 1760. George III. was more of an
Englishman than either of his predecessors on the throne,
and had no wish to enforce vexatious and persecuting laws
against any of his subjects. The Episcopal clergy aware of
this, began to officiate more openly, and to disregard the
existing statutes. The accession of George III. was to the
suffering Church in Scotland as the first streak ofthe coming
dawn. There is however one instance on record of some
obscure Episcopalians at Keith having even at this late period
to suffer fpr their attachment to the ancient faith. I3efore
relating this painful story it is necessary to say a little about
one who occupied a prominent place in the annals of the
time, viz., the Reverend William Longmore.

74 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.

The Reverend William Longmore,
This clergyman belonged to the Episcopalian family of
Longmoor (as it was then spelt), whose name was held in
honour in the district two centuries ago.*
The Reverend William Longmore officiated at Strathisla
in 1761 to the members of the Episcopal Church. Owing to
the oppressive laws of the day, his audience was necessarily
limited to five people at a time. The work moreover was hard,
and involved danger both to Pastor and people. For zeal and
devotion to duty, Pr. Longmore was distinguished above
his fellows. Driven from one district by penal enactments,
it was not long before he made his appearance in another,
and large numbers of people, even in defiance of the
law, not unfrequently flocked to his ministrations. He was
well-known from Banffshire to Caithness, and at one time
held an Episcopal charge at Wick. Of Mr. Longmore it
was said by Bishop Robert Forbes that he was not to be
trusted with a matter of weight, because he could not keep a
secret. No doubt we may commend the prudence of the
accuser, but we can also sympathise with the accused.
Secrets are not even now unfrequently dangerous possessions
and they were peculiarly so in the days wilh which we have
been dealing.
Mr. Longmore lived at Auchinhove, now a farmhouse,
about half-a-mile to the east of Newmills. At this village,
itself a mile from the town of Keith, the Episcopal services
seem to have been performed after the destruction of the
Church at Rosarie.
Many were the episodes, painful and pathetic, associated
with the pastoral duties of the clergy of our Church during
those dark and troublous days. The following example
from the traditions of the period may not be without interest.
In the dusk ot a September evening in the year 1761, two
young men entered Mr. Longmore's house. Lights had
been brought in, but the shutters were not yet closed.
Possibly Mr. Longmore was about to read the Evening
Prayers from that book which,next to the Bible,he prized above
all other volumes. The two men were Robert Paterson and
James Downie. Aflet a short time the latter requested Mr.
Longmore to proceed to Newmills that night for the purpose of
¦* In 1684 a Mr. Wiliiam Longmoor, Schoolmaster in Strathisla, received a
call from the Magistrates of Montrose to be head.master of the Academy in,
that town — this was an important appointment at that time.

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 75
marrying him to Isabella Downie. Mr, Longmore consented
at once, paying no heed to the warning words of James
Downie, who tried to dissuade "him from doing it till he
should take some time to think of it." It was doubtless well
known to James Downie, and to other Episcopalians at Keith,
that in 1755 theRev. John Connochar, a Highland Episcopalian
of irreproachable character, had been sentenced to perpetual
banishment from Scotland, and forbidden to return under pain
of death, for celebrating a marriage according to the rites of
his Church. Mr. Longmore was, however, a courageous and
determined man. He set off at -once with his companions
for Newmills, distant about half-a-mile from Auchinove.
The marriage ceremony, as described by the witnesses,
was at once simple and impressive. Mr. Longmore
read the service from the Book of Common Prayer. Mar
garet Lobban, a companion of Isabella Downie, acted as
bridesmaid at this humble wedding. She entered the
room just as the ceremony was beginning. Mr. Long-
more was there, and as she stated when examined before the
Kirk Session of Keith " they were all standing up, and he was
setting about the marriage ; he had a Prayer Book in his
hand, and said something off it, but as she had never heard
any of their marriages, she could not say whether it was
according to the form of the Prayer Book, but is very sensible
that he prayed, and that after the ceremony was over she
saw him stay very cheerfully." Mr. Longmore had taken his
own. Prayer Book to the house of John Steinson where this
marriage took place, and it came out afterwards in the exam
ination of the witness that though John Steinson also owned
a copy of the Book of Common Prayer he kept it concealed
in a " bowie. " The book that had afforded comfort and solace
to countless souls, generation after generation, had to be hid
den away in a barrel from inquisitorial eyes. The marriage
at Newmills took place after 10 o'clock at night, and the
Keith Session Records state that at this period such mar
riages were frequent in the district. For the offence com
mitted by Robert Paterson and Isabella Downie in being
married by their "ain minister," they were brought before
the Keith Kirk Session on Sept. 25th, three weeks after the
wedding day: The charge was kept hanging over their heads
until the following year, when they were fined " Three Pounds
Scots, sharply rebuked suitably exhorted and dismissed from
discipline." It will hardly be believed that such cruel intolerance exist
ed no further back than "when George III. was King." In
England how different the associations with such a ser-
F

76 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
vice would have been, the Church doors thrown wide, the
flower strewn pavement, the bells sending forth a joyful peal,
whether the married pair came from the castle of the noble
man or from the cottage of the poor. This was probably
almost the last infliction of such a penalty. Brighter days
were soon to come to the Scottish Church.
The foUowing extracts from the Keith Kirk Session con
firm every detail ofthe narrative we have been describing : —
Keith, Sept. l8th, 1761. — " Session met and constituted. The
clerk introduced a letter from the minister of Grange, bearing that
Robert Paterson and Isabel Downie were cited to this meeting and
compearing, and also John Steinson and the witnesses alledged to be
present. Robert Paterson and Isabel Downie were interrogated if
they acknowledged themselves married persons. Confessed they did.
Then being interrogated when and by whom, they said they were
not at liberty to acknowledge that, and become their own accusers.
Then being asked who were witnesses to their marriage, answered,
they were not at liberty to confess that either. Then John Steinson
in Newmill being called and compearing, was interrogated if he, as
was commonly reported, was the person who had married Robert
Paterson and Isabel Downie in Stripeside, said he was not ; being
further asked if he was present at the marriage, answered he was ;
being further asked what day they were married and in whose house,
answered they were married upon the second day of September, in
his house ; being asked who were witnesses, answered that Margaret
Downie, his wife, and James Downie, in Newmill, Jannet Downie,
and Margaret Lobban were all present. Being then interrogated
who was the celebrator, replied that he was Mr. William Longmoor,
Non-jurant Minister at Auchinhove. That he heard he came in
company with Robert Paterson and James Downie, who had a little
before gone out of his house where they had been for some time .
before. Signs his declaration — Signed, James Steinson.
Called, compeared James Downie in Newmill, and being inten o-
gated if he was present at Robert Paterson and Isabel Downie's
marriage, declared he was. Being asked when, where, and by
whom they were married, answered they were married by Mr. Long
moor, Non-jurant Minister at Auchinhove, in the house of John
Steinson in Newmill, but doth not remember the day. Being asked
by whom Mr. Longmoor was called, answered that he, the Declar
ator, was in the house of the said John Steinson with Robert Pater
son that evening, and that about nine at night he went to convey
Robert Paterson home, that as they went past Mr. Longmoor's
house, they spyed light through his windows, and turning in both
together, found Mr. Longmoor alone, and after some short time
Robert Paterson proposed to Mr. Longmoor to go with him. to New-
mill and marry him and Isabel Downie, which Mr. Longmoor
readUy undertook, notwithstanding he, the Declarator, dissuaded
him from doing it tUl he should take some time to think of it. That

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 7 7
accordingly they went all back to Newmill to the said John Stein-
son's house, where he heard Mr. Longmoor perform the ceremony
at full length off the Prayer-book which he had all the time in his
hand. Being further asked if he heard an}' report that these parties
were married before by any other person, replied that he heard such
a report, but knew nothing of it, as he was working in Roihiemay
at the time it was said to have happened. And that he declares is
truth. Signed, James Downie.
May 9th, 1762. — Mr. Archibald Campbell, Minister of Grange,
preached to declare Keith Church vacant.
Mr. Campbell further reported that he had last week an extract
from the clerk of this session of their minute of the 25th of September
last, relative to the irregular marriage of Robert Paterson and
Isabel Downie, and that though the said Robert Paterson and
Isabel Downie are now residing in the parish of Grange, yet the
Kirk Session of Grange think it no ways competent for ihcm to take
this matter under their cognizance as the scandal was committed in
the paris'n of Keith, and therefore he had appointed the Kirk officer
of Grange to summon the said parties to this meeting of session to
undergo such censure as they shall see meet to inflict upon them.
The session taking this matter under consideration called the said
Robert Paterson and Isabel Downie, and they compearing, owned
themselves to be husband and wife, and professed their sorrow for
the offence they had given by their irregular marriage and their
willingness to submit themselves to the censure of this session, and
offered three pounds Scots 10 the session for the behalf of the poor
in the parish of Keith. They being removed, the session, after
mature deliberation, agreed to dismiss them from discipline upon a
sessional rebuke, and they being called in, instantly paid the three
pounds Scots, and were sharply rebuked, suitably exhorted and
dismissed from discipline. Closed with prayer.
William Falconer, Bishop of Moray, and Primus, having
been chosen Bishop cf Edinburgh (where he had chiefly
resided for some years previous to his election) resigned
the See of Moray in 1776. Bishops at that time did not
always reside in their own dioceses ; they were now, how
ever, elected and consecrated to the care of a particular
See, — a great improvement upon the anomalous " College "
system, introduced after the Revolution. In 1776 the Rev.
Arthur Petrie, Presbyter at Meiklefolla in Aberdeenshire,
had been consecrated coadjutor Bishop of Mora)', and in
1777 he succeeded to the sole charge of the Diocese.
Robert Forbes, Bishop of Ross and Caithness, passed away
in 1775. We owe much to this prelate for his journals and
other manuscripts, which contain many interesting and valu
able details about his contemporaries. He was always an
ardent Jacobite, a fact illustrated by his occasionally drinking

78 The Church at Keith in- the Eighteenth Century. .
the health of the " King over the Water " out of a pair of
old shoes that once were worn by the latter, and by the
yearly dispatch of a cake to St. Germains, a tribute Of loyalty
prepared by the hands of Mrs. Forbes herself, for the exiled
Prince.
The Rev. Andrew Macfarlane.
This clergyman was sent to Keith by Bishop Petrie in
1777. Born at Edinburgh in 1743, he was educated for the
Church at Meiklefolia,. in Aberdeenshire, where Bishop
Petrie had been Incumbent prior to his election to the See
of Moray. In those days the parsonages of some of the clergy
were also seminaries, where the principles of theology were
taught, and this was eminently the case at the house of the
Rev. Arthur Petrie. Though the penal laws were still unre
pealed, the pefsecution was practically over ; poverty and ex
haustion however remained to contend against, and the
Bishops found the utmost difficulty in providing candidates
for the ministry. Vacancies could only be filled up by placing
two, and sometimes three, congregations under the charge of
one clergyman. Mr. Macfarlane was well qualified for this
kind of work, possessing as he did, both intellectual and bodily
power of no mean order. There is little doubt that he had
the charge of the congregations of Ruthven and Aberchirder,,
as well as that of Keith. The physical exertion consequent
upon so wide a distribution of work was great, and it was
fortunate for the united congregations that such a pastor was
forthcoming. .It is probable, as already mentioned, that the Church of
Rosarie was either burned or destroyed by Cumberland's-
troops ; and it was at the village of Newmills, about a mile
and a-half distant from Rosarie and Keith, that Mr. Macfar
lane officiated. To avoid lega,l penalties, the services were
at this time performed for the most part in private houses.
The house at Newmill used for the purpose was in the
occupation of one William Barber. It had a "fiel," or turf
roof, which in those days was looked upon as a mark of a
superior kind of building. After the death of William Barber
his relations continued to inhabit the cottage, and the roof
fell in only a short whUe ago. In this humble place of wor
ship Mr. Macfarlane assembled his little flock on the Sun
days, when he was not absent at Ruthven or Aberchirder.*
* A Bible was in use on these occasions on which there was the follow;ing
holograph inscription :—" Andrew Macfarlane, Newmilne, 12th Sunday after
Trinity, 1779, given by Mrs. Innes, Muiryfold, to him, which, he leaves for the
use of the Episcopal Congregation of Newmilne, with a Folio 'Copy of the Book
of Com. Prayer.' The Prayer Bdiok had once belonged to Bishop Falconer.

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 79
The defeat at Culloden became in the Providence of God,
a blessing to the Episcopal Church of Scotland. When the
Stuart cause became hopeless, the Clergy devoting less
thought to politics, attended to their pastoral work with greater
assiduity. The less political a Church, the more spiritual it
becomes. Not only was increased attention given to pas
toral duties, but a revival of learning also took place. The
study of the Old Testament in the original Hebrew, became a
favourite pursuit with the clergy. Mr. Macfarlane himself was ,
a great Hebrew scholar and a Hutchin'sonian, this word indi
cating a curious heresy which arose in the early part of the
i8th century. John Hutchinson, born in 1674 at the village of
Spennithorpe in Yorkshire, was best known as the author of
a book called the "Principia" published in 1724-27. In aU
questions of religion and morals Mr. Hutchinson held that the
ultimate appeal lay to the Hebrew scriptures which were
interpreted by him in a mystica>l and typical sense.* The
absurd heresy of Hutchinsonianism soon became extinct, the
last Episcopal clergyman belonging to the school, being the
Rev. John Murdoch of Keith. This gentleman, like Mr. Mac
farlane, was aiman of high mental power, and it is therefore
the more singular that such men should ever have counten
anced a theory by which the works of God as seen in nature,
were often placed in apparent opposition to the word of God
in Revelation.
The Keith Session Records mention no persecutions of
Episcopalians during the period of-Mr. Macfarlane's ministry
at Keith, and we may therefore conclude that they were now
permitted to worship God after their own way, without let or
hindrance. Ruthven, about six miles from Keith, is a sequestered hamlet
at the south-east side of the Balloch Hill, distant about two
miles from the Great North of Scotland Railway on one side,
and from Cairnie in the opposite direction. Cairnwhelp, where
the two Harpers officiated, lies somewhat nearer to Cairnie.
The Established Presbyterian Minister of Cairnie after 1688
favoured the Episcopalians, because having entered the
Church prievous to the Revolution, he had as a matter of fact
received Episcopal ordination. The Rev. Alexander Rose
of Cairnie was not only an Episcopalian, but he was also a
Jacobite at heart. In I7i6heread the Chevalier's proclama
tion, and for this he was deposed. There can he little doubt
* He denied Sir Isaac Newton's theory of gravitation and the possibility of a
vacuum. Sir Isaac notwithstanding this, gave Mr. Hutchinson unqualified praise
for the discovery of a chronometer to discover the longitude at sea.

So The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
that the Episcopalian place of worship was changed from
Cairnwhelp to Ruthven soon after the Rev. William Harper
left the neighbourhood. The Very Rev. Dean Shand of
Buckie used to affirm that at the end of the i8th century
he administered the Holy Communion at Ruthven to more
than ICO communicants. In all probability, therefore, the
Rev. Andrew Macfarlane had a large congregation at this
place. In the church-yard of Ruthven the ruins of the pre- Refor
mation Church are still standing. The gable and belfry
remain with part of the north wall, and the bell wont to be
used at funerals is there as in days of yore. This bell is
called the " Wow of Riven." Reference is made in a certain
work of fiction to the " Wow " seeming as it rang to iterate
the words "come hame, come hame, come hame !" What
associations the word "home" would bring up to the mind
of a non-juring clergyman at the beginning of the l8th cen
tury ! Strangers were domiciled in the home that once was
his, and as for his friends, they had either gone to their long
home, or were dwelling in exile in other lands. Home, pro
perly so called, he had not. He was often hunted from
place to place like one of the beasts of the forest ; and all
this had come to pass, because he would neither break his
plighted word nor do violence to his conscience by taking
the oath of allegiance to an alien and a usurper. Should he
seem to hear in the knell toiled upon the " Wow" of Ruth
ven the words " come hame, come hame," there would be
comfort in the sound, for his thoughts would be led to that
eternal home where " the wicked cease from troubling and
the weary are at rest." There, dynastic strifes can never dis
turb the unending peace ; there, no earthly kings can usurp
the crown of Christ ; the crown of victory now rests upon the
brow once garlanded with thorns ; there, no earthly power
can still the song of ceaseless praise, for that song shall go
up as "the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of
many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying,
AUeluia ; for the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth."
The Rev. Andrew Macfarlane, became in 1787 Bishop of
Moray, Ross, and Caithness, in succession to Bishop Petrie,
whose coadjutor he had been, for a short time previously.
Mr. Macfarlane left Keith for Inverness a few years before
his elevation to the Episcopate. Another candidate had
been named as possessing the requisite qualificatipns for
the vacant Bishopric, viz., the Rev. Alex. Jolly, Incumbent
of the Church at Fraserburgh. It was doubtless a good

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 8 1
thing for the Diocese that the choice fell upon Mr. Macfar
lane. For a Highland Diocese it was desirable that the
Bishop should be conversant with the Gaelic tongue, and
this. Bishop Macfarlane was able to speak with fluency.
The distances to be traversed being great, and the roads for
the most part of a most primitive description the Bishop's
robust physique was excellently suited to what he had to,
encounter. Such a See could not have been worked by a
Bishop from the retirement of his study. The personal
presence of the Chief Pastor was necessary to encourage the
few struggling Presbyters who remained, and who were
separated from each other by many a long mile.
The Rev. Alexander Christie.
The Rev. Alexander Christie, born at or near Cumines-
town, in Aberdeenshire, was sent to Keith in succession to
Mr. Macfarlane, by Bishop Petrie, most likely about the year
1780. He was one of the students of theology at the
Meiklefolla Parsonage. Mr. Christie officiated at Keith,
Ruthven, and Aberchirder. In 1784 the Scottish Bishops
consecrated Samuel Seabury as the first Bishop of the great
Anglican Communion sent out to the United States of
America. That act of faith and dourage won the admira
tion of great Divines, both at home and abroad, and from
that hour our Church in Scotland has made continuous pro
gress. The State was taught that Churches have spiritual
duties to perforin, which the civil power has neither the right
nor the ability to forbid. On the last day of January, 1788,
Prince Charles Edward died at Rome, and the impediment
was removed which had hitherto prevented bishops and
clergy from praying for the reigning sovereign, and' from
taking the oath of allegiance to the House of Hanover. The
Episcopalians of Keith now began to think about building
up their waste places once again, and a new church was
opened at Keith on the seventh Sunday after Trinity, 1791.
The preacher was the Rev. Alex. Christie, and the autograph
sermon he used on this occasion is in the hands of the present
Incumbent of Keith.* Though the hand that wrote this dis
course has long since mouldered in the grave, and though the
voice that uttered its sentences to the faithful remnant has
long been hushed in death, yet the words spoken by the
Presbyter at Keith, nearly a century ago, and just a year
* A few years ago, upon the anniversary of the consecration of the present church,
the present Incumbent read that sermon to his congregation. The paper is
yellow with age, but the handwriting is legible as on tlie day on which it was
written.

82 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
before the repeal of the penal enactments, are fraught with
lessons most valuable to us at the present day.
The new chapel in Keith was opeped on the seventh Sun
day after Trinity, 1791. Mr. Christie's sermon,* already
alluded to, began as follows :— "The mercy of God to fallen
man is a subject so large, the instances of it so numerous, and
their value so great, that it were not to be wondered at
did we not know where to begin, where to end, or with what
words to celebrate them. Justly, therefore, do we invoke
God, the Author of every good and perfect gift, to affect our
hearts, put words in our mouths, and to 'open our lips' be
fore we endeavour 'to shew forth His praise.'"
Though the new church at Keith in 1791 was only a
humble cottage, it must have been prized alike by pastor and
congregation. Nearly half a century had elapsed since the
Episcopalians of the place had possessed any place of wor
ship they could call their own. Mr. Christie had even
striven to invest the "cottage" with some of the architectural
attributes of a, church. " There were diamond-shaped panes
of glass in the windows." The structure may have even ap
peared, in the eyes of the simple folk who worshipped therein,
to possess a certain ecclesiastical splendour of its own. To
those who had been compelled to offer prayer and praise
after their own fashion, in the solitude of the lonely glen, or
in an upper room, the new church was, from every point of
view, something for which their grateful thanks were due to
the Author and Giver of all good things. As Mr. Christie
himself expressed it — " How thankful ought we to be, to
Almighty God, that by our united endeavours, and the
munificence of pious friends, we have this' day such a house
to resort to. We have hitherto, like the Ark of God, been
removed from place to place, and sometimes but ill accom
modated ; but His church was as venerable, whatever a giddy
and graceless world may think, 'in an upper room,' in 'a
hired house,' ' in ' a den or cave of the earth,' as in ' an ivory
palace.' These are but circumstantials, and nowise affect
her existence, so ought never to discourage or puff up her
members. Yet ought we for this signal mercy this day con
ferred upon us, with hearts overflowing with gratitude, make
?The first page of Mr. Christie's sermon is surmounted by a cross, beneath
which is the following : — " A sermon preached at the opening of the New Chapel
in Keith, on the 7th Sunday in Trinity, 1791'. By the Rev. Mr. Alex. Christie."
.Vir. Christie prpached this sermon a second time, as appears from this note on
the same page, — ", Preached at Ardmealie, 2nd Sund. Tr., 1794." "The text is
Isaiah lvi._7, " My house shall be called an house of prayer for all people. '^ At
a later period Mr. Christie used to publish his discourses, and Bishop Jolly was
himself a purchaser of them- to a considerable extent.

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 83
our just and decent acknowledgment to Almighty God, the
Author of every good and perfect gift. . . . But it is a small
-matter to come to the house of God, unless we behave our
selves there in a decent and devout manner. Let therefore
our demeanour be expressive of our own wants and un-
worthiness, and of the glorious Inhabitant of this house."
The preacher then reminded his congregation, that on enter
ing God's house, they should offer up some such silent
aspirations as these, —
" O Lord, I am now in Thy house of prayer ; assist I pray Thee,
and accept of my services ! Enable me and all who shall this day
meet in "Thy Name, to worship Thee in Spirit and in Truth ! Let
Thy Holy Spirit help our infirmities, and dispose our hearts to
-seriousness, attention and devotion : and grant that we may improve
this opportunity to the honour of Thy Holy Name, and the benefit of
our souls, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen."
It is sometimes said that when the clergyman has to de
pend too much upon his people for his means of existence,
they may on that account interfere with the fulfilment of his
duties, should these cross their own wishes. On the other
hand there can be little doubt that rich endowments have a
tendency to make the Pastor in some cases forgetful of the
wishes of his flock. The Nonjurors during the period of
the persecution, lived, so to speak, from hand to mouth, but
we may infer from ^Ir. Christie's language that they were
faithful in rebuking carelessness and irreligion among their
people. " Then remembering " — such are the words of
the discourse we have been quoting — '' that Christ the
Head of His Church had committed to its governors the
power of judicially "binding and loosing, of retaining, re
mitting, and forgiving sins ; we may close our books, and
in faith, humility, and gratitude, receive from His Am
bassador the authoritative and effective ' Absolution and
remission of our sins.' And how absurd and preposterous
a conduct is it, my brethren, and yet, alas I how common
during these most essential and important parts of Divine
Worship, to be staring about at every idle spectator or late
comer ? Let me ask such distracted and dissipated worship
pers what they would think of a criminal, who, upon his
knees before his judge, begging his life, was yet all the while
staring about him this way and that way, at every person in
the Court, or those who came into it ? Would not the judge
think that the man, instead of preferring a petition, was only
insulting him in a piece of ironical mockery ? Consider this,
and make the application yourselves. But I'm sorry often
to observe that those whose better sense might render them

84 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
examples to others, are yet in this re.spect the most culpable.
Certainly they can derive no benefit from the service they
pretend to be engaged in ; and for my part, unless they
correct this behaviour, I would gladly dispense with their
presence. And as for those tardy, late comers, who thus
disturb their neighbours in their devotions, they must either
be insensible of the burden of their sins, ignorant of their
Church's power in their absolution, or a pharisaical sort of
men who, standing upon their own righteousness, and so
believing they need neither pardon nor grace, distain to say,
God be merciful to me a sinner. '
These were certainly plain words to late comers and to
mere on-lookers during divine service.
The unity ofthe Church was strongly insisted upon by the
preacher as follows — " An absurd and impious notion has gone
abroad into the world that the Church of Christ is not one,
but an assemblage of many heterogeneous bodies possessing
different and contradictory faiths and under different forms
of Government : therefore we are frequently premonished
that the Body of Christ or his Church is but one, as its head
is but one. For there is one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism,
one God, and Father of all, &c,," Eph. iv. 4, Mr. Christie
also defined the position Of the Church as Apostolic and
Episcopal, in the following words : —
"Yet stUl the worshippers wheresoever diffused and dis
persed over the world, constitute but one aggregate body,
having one head, governed by Pastors of his appointment,
in uninterrupted succession from the Apostles, and profess
ing the same ' faith which was at first delivered to the
Saints.' "
Mr. Christie concluded his sermon in thesQ words : —
" From this short and itnperfect sketch you may perceive,
that if our public prayers be defective, it must be owing to
the default of those who use them. The Church hath taken
admirable care of her part, and by the prudent constitution
of a most excellent Liturgy, given us great hopes of obtain
ing the mercies we are directed to pray for. And, ' Let thy
merciful ears, O Lord, be open to the prayers of thy humble
servants, and that they may obtain their petitions, make
them to ask such things, and in such a manner as shaU
please Thee, through Jesus Christ our Lord,'"
In the year 1792, the most obnoxious clauses ofthe penal
laws were annulled, an obligation, however, being laid upon the
clergy, to take the oaths of allegiance and assurance, and to

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 85
subscribe a declaration of assent to the thirty-nine Articles
of the Church of England. Clergy in Scottish orders were still
disqualified from holding livings in the Church of England,
or from officiating to congregations of that Communion. It
was reserved for the nineteenth century to see the last traces
of persecution erased from the statute books of the British
Legislature. The night of adversity was over. At the
beginning ofthe eighteenth century the shadows of the night
were gathering fast, and the thunder of the guns upon
Culloden Moor ushered in the period of deepest darkness ;
the first ray of dawn appeared when George III. ascended
the English throne, and the dawn itself had fully come when
Bishop Seabury was consecrated in the tipper room at
Aberdeen. The year 1792 was to the Church in Scotland
as the bursting forth of the sunlight. Had the watchman on
the tower of our spiritual Zion, been that year questioned —
"Watchman, what of the night? Watchman, what of the
night ? " he might well have replied in the words of the self
same prophet — " The morning cometh, and also the night ;
if ye will enquire, enquire ye ; return, come." May the period
of noon-day splendour come in the after time, when all who
name the name of Christ in our mountain-land, will seek to
unite their forces and close their ranks, under the Historic
Episcopate and the Great Shepherd and Bishop of the souls
of men, their only foes being the enemies of the Cross of
Christ. In the year 1796 the Rev. Alexander JoUy, Presbyter at
Fraserburgh was consecrated Coadjutor to IJishop Macfarlane,
though the latter was neither in ill-health, nor incapacitated
from performing his Episcopal duties. The piety and learning
of Mr. Jolly had long marked him .out as one well fitted for
the office of a Bishop, and it seems to have been chiefly with
a view of raising him to the Episcopate that Bishop Macfarlane
asked for a Coadjutor. In 1798 Bishop Macfarlane resigned
the See of Moray, retaining, however, the Dioceses of Ross
and Argyll, and Bishop Jolly having been elected by the
Clergy of Moray was collated to that Diocese by the Primus
and his colleagues. The wide range of Bishop Jolly's studies
saved him from Hutchinsonian tendencies exhibited by
certain of the Bishops, and his accurate theological know
ledge enabled him to counteract and refute doctrines
savouring of Sabellianism by which Bishop Macfarlane and
others were themselves tainted.
Bishop Jolly visited the congregations of Aberchider, Keith,
and Ruthven, then under the care of Mr. Christie, once every
three years. In 1798 he held a confirmation at Aberchirder,

86 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
and another soon after, either at Keirh or Ruthven,* The seat
rents of Keith and Ruthven amounted to ^^17, but the people
of Aberchirder were not satisfied with the number of services
which Mr. Christie was able to give then. Aberchirder is in
the parish of Marnoch, Bishop JoUy always speaking of this
•charge under the later name. A quarrel had arisen at
Marnoch about a seat rent, and the unpleasantness following
upon this dispute, led to the separation of Marnoch from
Keith and Ruthven, the first named charge falling to the
care of the Rev. Mr. Cardno of Banff, and the two latter being
retained by Mr. Christie, whose stipend was considerably
lessened on that account. The Pastor of Keith and Ruthven
was much discouraged, and he threatened to abandon the
work of the ministry altogether, As an antidote to this idea
the Bishop told Mr. Christie to ponder over three passages
¦of Holy Scripture, viz., St. Luke ix. 62 ; Heb. x. 38 ; and i
Cor. ix. 16.
This timely remonstrance was effectual to prevent Mr.
Christie from given up the solemn work undertaken by him
-at his ordination, but it did not cause him to give up his
intention of leaving Keith, Bishop Jolly was in great per
plexity. Candidates for the ministry were few indeed, and
he well knew how hard it would be to find one, who, for the ,
love of Christ and of His poor at Keith_and Ruthven, would
¦undertake such difiicult and labourious duties. In the end,
after difficulty and delay, John Murdoch, a young man of
great ability, undertook the care of the combined charges,
and was ordained by Bishop Jolly at Ruthven, about the
beginning ofthe igfh century.
Mr. Christie was much beloved by his flock, but the fre-
•quent journeys to Marnoch and Ruthven had evidently told
upon his health. Work involving so much physical en
durance not unfrequently proves fatal to the strongest con
stitutions, a fact of which we ourselves think too little, seeing
how slender are the allowances even now for the mission
priests of our Church. Mr. Christie preached a farwell ser
mon t,o the congregations at Keith and Ruthven on the
second Sunday after Trinity, i8oo.t His latter days were
spent at Old Deer, Aberdeenshire, where he officiated ; and
his death occurred most probably about the year 1808.
Mr. Christie's "cottage" Church at Keith, was in Bridge
* The Church at Ruthven, was at a place about loo yards distance from the
-"Wow of Ruthven," ajready mentioned, where now stands the farm-house of
Little Dach. Mr. Christie lived at Keith at Cottlehill presently called the Cuthill.
t Vide Gordon's Chronicles of Keith.

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 8j
Street, and as a cottage, it is still standing and inhabited.
The eighteenth century had begun with persecutions and
troubles for the Episcopalians of Keith ; the end of it saw
them worshipping peaceably in this humble church, and
protected by the laws of the land. They could now sing
with deeper meaning — " I was glad when they said unto me :
we will go into the house of the Lord. Our feet shall stand
in thy gates : O Jerusalem. Jerusalem is built as a city •
that is at unity in itself O pray for the peace of Jerusalem :
they shall prosper that love thee. Yea, because of the house-
of the Lord our God : I will seek to do thee good."

Thoughts suggested by the Foregoing Narrative.
In the century in which we live, nothing can pass as true
history which is not supported by indisputable evidence.
Reasons are now demanded for everything, and alleged facts
are sifted to. their foundation. The truth and nothing but
the truth is called for in all the various departments of
historical research. Popular errors of the past, plausible as
they may have seemed at the time, cannot stand against the
relentless scrutiny of the present day. All lovers of the truth
must be thankful that this is the case. It is the truth only
that can be well pleasing to Him, Who is Himself the Truth
and our Divine Example in all things.
True history requires that the whole truth be stated, a
partial declaration of historical facts being sihiply a sup-
pressio veri. If an historian relates the various persecutions
endured by the Scottish Covenanters in the seventeenth
century, and utterly ignores the persecution suffered by the
Scottish Episcopalians in the eighteenth century, he cannot
be said to have written an impartial narrative. On the other
hand, Scottish Episcopalians should always be ready to ac
knowledge that the mistaken policy of the State, in days gone
by, brought persecution to Presbyterians as well as to their
own predecessors in the faith. It was no advantage to the
Episcopal Church of Scotland to have been re-introduced
into I this land by the Civil Power in the days of Charles II.
Better would it have been for her had she relied solely on
her Divine Master, and upon the Spiritual powers derived
from Him. But it was the ruling of God's Providence that
it should be otherwise, and God's Providepce is always at
work for good behind the scenes, whether of political or social
life. The more we look into the subject, the clearer evidence
we shall find that the persecutions whether of Presbyterians

88 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
or Episcopalians had the same origin, viz., the undue inter
ference of the State in spiritual things.
Persecution always involves the violation of some great
moral law. There is a domain of the soul and of the
conscience into which earthly kings and states should
never intrude themselves. The laws of earthly kings and
states may sometimes be at variance with the eternal moral
laws of the King of Kings. The law of man may command
one thing, and the law of the Eternal Majesty may command
another. At such a time, can there be any doubt, which law
is to receive our homage.'' Must not the divine command
outweigh the decree of man ? "Whether it be right in the
sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge
ye." As the State has no right to interfere with the spiritual
relations that subsists between the soul of man and his
Creator, so the State should not seek to adjust by its laws the
spiritual concerns of any Church or body of Christians.
Whenever the State has been guilty of such interference,
sorrow and misery has resulted to many a disciple of Jesus,
and many a noble heart has been keenly wounded. Kings of
the earth have had to be taught by dearly bought experience
that they do not exist for themselves ; they are not to be
above the laws ; but they are to sanction and carry out those
laws which will diffuse the most widespread happiness and en
sure the truest liberty to their subjects.
That was a memorable day in the History of England
when the stout-hearted Stephen Langton, Archbishop of
Canterbury, and the equally resolute and stout-hearted
Barons, wrested from the reluctant John the Great Charter
of English liberties. The first provision of Magna Charta
ran as foUows — " That the Church of England shall be free,
and have her whole rights and her liberties inviolable."
What other construction can be put upon these words than
this, that the State is not to interfere with the Church in her
spiritual domain ? In after days monarchs of England
trangressed this clause guaranteeing the freedom of the
Church. Her rights were trampled upon both by the Tudors
and the Stuarts. The great moral law of spiritual freedom
was violated alike when the non-conformists were persecuted in
the time ofthe Stuarts, when the Church herself was oppress
ed in the period of the Commonwealth ; when the Coven
anters of the western shores were done to death in the .17th
century, and when Scottish Episcopalians were persecuted
in the century that followed.

The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century. 89
When the great Charter of English liberty was promul
gated, there was, of course, but one Communion in England ;
but the principles underlying that charter remain unchanged
by time, and the same spiritual liberty which was accorded to
the Church of England, as it existed in the thirteenth century,
should be ensured to all Christian communions now under
British sway. In this respect the Episcopal Church of
Scotland, and the several Presbyterian denominations, enjoy
more liberty than the Church as established in Southern
Britain. Our own branch of the Anglican Communion is
self-governing. She makes her own laws, and herself de
cides all spiritual and doctrinal questions, the final appeal in
every case being to the Synod of Bishops. The Presbyterian
Churches give an ultimate decision in all questions of the
same kind by means of their General Assemblies. On the
other hand, beyond the limited authority of the restored
Convocation, the Church of England has no representative
Assembly corresponding to the Presbyterian Assemblies of
Scotland ; and the Bishops of the Church of England do
not assemble in Synod to adjudicate in disputes, involving
questions of doctrine and ritual. The want of a Synod
possessing such powers is much felt in England at the present
day. Churchmen could trust such a court as truly representing
the Church, while they cannot submit to the judgment of a
secular or semi-secular tribunal in matters spiritual. Hence
haS come the spectacle of zealous and saintly priests being
sent to prison for refusing to obey the dictates of a secular
judge. The stories of their sufferings resemble those of
the Scottish Covenanters, and of the Scottish Episcopalians
as recorded in the foregoing narrative. The great King of
Kings has said : " Render therefore unto Casar the things
that are Csesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."
To bind and control the consciences of Christian men, is to
go beyond Caesar's prerogative. The story recently con
cluded in these pages tells of the persecutions that took
place in one district, and we may assume that the tale might
be indefinitely extended to other parts of the country. What
inference may be drawn from such a narrative ?
The persecutions undergone by the Scottish Episcopal
Church prove that she is no exotic. Through all the troubles
of the eighteenth century, she clung tenaciously to Scottish
soil, like the native heather that grows and blooms upon our
hills. Political combinations of the most powerful kind
have been unable to uproot her from this land. She has
realised in a higher and nobler sense, the words of the

90 The Church at Keith in the Eighteenth Century.
Roman poet, in that she has become stronger and purer
as the result of the very troubles themselves, —
" Duris ut ilex tonsa bipennibus
Nigrae feraci frondis^ in Algido,
Per damna, per csedes, ab ipso
Ducit opes animumque ferro."
(Horace, Odes IV., 4,)
By persecution men exalt the very cause they are seeking to
destroy. Persecution is the work of Satan, not of God, To
all who are persecuted there comes a voice of comfort from the
mouth of Him, Who spake as never man spake. His gaze
extended down the centuries that were to come, His omniscient
Eye saw all the sorrovvs that were tp oppress His Church.
That Voice says to all who are persecuted now, and its
accents will reverberate through all the ages that are yet
to come, "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and
shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for My sake.
Rejoice and be exceeding glad : for great is your reward in
heaven ; for so persecuted they the prophets which were
before you."

Zhc Cburcb at Ikeitb
IN THE
NINETEENTH CENTURY.

At the dawn of the century, the attention of the nation
was concentrated upon the ambitious designs of the great
Napoleon. Fear of a threatened invasion united Englishmen
and Scotchmen of all classes and creeds against the common
foe ; and the internal strifes of the eighteenth century were
well nigh forgotten in the continuous conflict that went on
almost without intermission, until the star of the victor of
Austerlitz and Jena set in disaster and defeat on the
field of Waterloo in 1815. Episcopalians and Presbyterians
fought side by side in that great contest, none being more
distinguished for valour than " the brave warriors of the
minstrels' land," the descendants of those who fought and
died on Culloden Moor. The Episcopal Church of Scot
land now began " to lengthen her cords, and to strengthen
her stakes.'' The disorders brought about by the persecu
tions of the eighteenth century were gradually removed, and
order was evolved from chaos. In 1804, a Convocation of
bishops and clergy met at Laurencekirk, and declared their
willingness to subscribe the Thirty-nine Articles of the
Church of England, and soon after this the qualified English
Episcopal concjrcgations in Scotland, hitherto separated from
the Church, began one by one to seek admission to her fold.
Among the clergy who thus submitted to the authority ofthe
Scottish Diocesans was the Rev. Daniel Sandford, Edinburgh,
Presbyter. He was consecrated Bishop of Edinburgh in
1806. This important event was a marked accession of
strength to the Scottish Church, and was in some sense the
foundation upon which has been built the influential position
of our Church in the capital of Scotland. G

92 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
Near the end of the eighteenth century. Bishop Jolly was
consecrated Coadjutor to Bishop Macfarlane ; the latter in
1798 resigning the See of Moray, but retaining the superin
tendence of Ross and Argyll. This has been already men
tioned in the sketches ofthe Histoi-y of the Church at Keith
during the eighteenth century. Bishop Jolly's election took
place at Keith on Feburary 14th, 1798, the electors being the
Rev. Hugh Buchan of Elgin, the Rev. Alex. Christie of Keith,
the Rev. James Walker of Huntly, and the Rev. Alex.
Shand for Fochabers. The Rev. Alex. Christie was succeeded
at Keith and Ruthven by the Rev. John Murdoch, who began
work there in the first year of the century. For the first half
of the nineteenth century, the history of the Church at Keith
must be indentified with the biography of
The Rev, John Murdoch.
Mr. Murdoch was born at Kaim of Duffus in 1767. In
the churchyard of Duffus there is a tomb-stone with this
inscription, —
"Here lyes ane honest man called Alexander Murdoch, sume
tyme lived in Buthill, and departed Sth March, 1683."
A. M,
J. M.
J. M.
The Roman poet has said, — " Fortes creantur fortibus et
bonis," and it could be truly said of John Murdoch that he
was "ane honest man," worthy, if he were so, to be a descend
ant of the Alexander Murdoch whose praise this stone records.
His was that type of Scottish character that drew forth from
our great National Poet the lines, —
" Princes and lords are but the breath of kings.
An honest man's the noblest work of God."
Mr. Murdoch was self-educated. He became, at an early
age, a schoolmaster on his own account, having built a
school " with two arched windows " for his rustic pupils.
He subsequently became a student at King's College, Aber
deen, travelling thither on horseback at the beginning of each
session, and finally taking his M.A. degree in 1792.
The Church was doubtless indebted to Bishop Macfarlane
for quickly recognising the sterling qualities of John
Murdoch. As in the dark days of the eighteenth century
" The College Bishops " handed down the Episcopal suc
cession, so in the latter part of that century and in the first
part of the nineteenth century, in a time of poverty and

The Church at Keith in ihe Nineteenth Century. 93
exhaustion, our gratitude is due to the Bishops of the day
for the selection of fit candidates for the ministry who were
educated not unfrequently at the Bishops' own residences.
After his graduation, Mr. Murdoch became tutor in the
family of Governor Brodie at Fort Augustus. He officiated
at Keith and Ruthven as a Deacon in the year 1800. The
Bishop of the Diocese then living at Fraserburgh in Aber
deenshire, made every effort however to become thoroughly
acquainted with his clergy and to help them in their diffi
culties. The following is an extract from a letter from
Bishop Jolly to Mr. Murdoch, dated October 25th, 1800 : —
" Reverend and dear Brother, — For several weeks past I have been
¦expecting the pleasure of seeing you here — but with a mixture of
pain, when I observe the state of the weather so unfavourable for
travelling. And very sorry should I have been, had your health
been anyhow hurt by the journey. You judge better, as I now find
by a letter from Mr. Cardno, at this late season of the year to post
pone it — though I must regret that I am thereby deprived of an
opportunity of becoming so much earlier and better acquainted with
you — which should have been, I doubt not, to the increase of my
satisfaction. I told you, I think, that good Bishop Abernethy
Drummond had generously resolved to add to your living at Keith
and Ruthven, .,^5 sterling a year. I had informed him of your
renunciation of the world and resolution to serve the Church ia
poverty ; and his words to me in return are these : —
' I am charmed with the resolution and fortitude of your young
man ! If he persevere, his merit will be great ; and he ought
certainly to have the countenance of every friend to the Church. I
shall give him at least £(, a year, while I live, and make some pro
vision soon (if a Decreet depending is in my favour) that a part, if
not the whole of that sum be continued to the clergyman at Keith
and Ruthven, so long as one shall officiate there.'
" But this intelligence," continued the good Bishop, "it is not
requisite to communicate to the people of the congregation, who
ought to contribute to the utmost of their power to the settlement
and continuance of a clergyman among them. I have just now in
my- hand £,(> sterling for you which I am looking about for an
opportunity of conveying to you. Be so good as to write me a long
letter to acquaint me of the particulars of your situation and what
appearance the prospects puts on to you. You had the pleasure, I
presume, of seeing your Worthy Patron, Bishop Macfarlane, on his
return from Aberdeen, who would give you good advice and direction
as to books, &c."
Then there follows a list of books which Mr. Murdoch was
to read in preparation for Priest's Orders. The strong bonds
of personal interest and affection that subsisted between
Bishop Jolly and his clergy are significantly indicated by
this letter. In due time Bishop Abernethy Drummond left

94 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
£\oo to endow the charges at Keith and Ruthven, and
entrusted its administration to the Friendly Society. But in
1807 at Mr. Murdoch's request this capital sum was paid over
to him to aid him in defraying the cost of the new Church
which was then being erected. This shows the self-sacrificing
spirit which animated the Pastor in everything he did for the
Church he loved so well. The money was never restored
to the Endowment Fund, and so for the next 43 years, the
Presbyter at Keith lost the annual interest ofthe capital sum.
Towards the close ofthe year 1800 Mr. Murdoch was in
vited to go to Fort Augustus in the Diocese of Ross, to form
a new congregation there. ' Bishop JoUy was in great fear lest
he should lose a Presbyter who was emphatically the right
man in the right place. He was not able to use the temporal
argument of offering a larger stipend ; he therefore resorted to
the nobler course of spiritual exhortation. Writing to Mr.
Murdoch on November 20th, 1800, the Bishop said, —
" You have a tempting offer of more pecuniary gain in your former
station, but if your former work is there to be your sole or principal
occupation, the momentous question recurs — whether having forsaken
it for Christ's sake and at His Call, and having put your hand tp a
different plough, you can with His approbation, so much as look
back ? No ! we have His word for it, that such tergiversation does
not consist with the Kingdom of God. With this your own inmost
sentiment accords — ^fuUy determined by God's Grace to give yourself
wholly to the one occupation, which you have chosen for life, and
draw all your cares and studies that way. This phraseology refers to
the Ordinal of Priests — Dr, Comber's Comment on which I hope you
will seriously peruse."
Mr. Murdoch was ordained priest by Bishop Jolly at Ruth
ven, on St. John Baptist's Day, June 24th, 1801. The Bishop
was to arrive at Achanachie on the previous evening and Mr,
Murdoch was to meet him there. 'Two presbyters were pre
sent to assist the Bishop. That was a solemn service under
the shadow of the ancient church at Ruthven, and the newly
ordained presbyter was in many ways to follow in the steps
of the Baptist who " patiently suffered for the truth's sake."
In a letter dated June 13th, 1801, the candidate was exhorted
by his Bishop, in the following words, as to the solemn vows
he was about to take : —
" May God by His Gracious Presence be with us, and fitly dis
pose us all for our respective parts. I am glad that you have read
Comber's Comment, and been the better enabled thereby to digest
the solemn vows which you are to make to God, and unalterably to
seal with the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood. To His Cross
we look, and on it must continually keep our eye fixed that we may

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 95
war a good warfare under His banner, and endure hardness as a
.good soldier of Jesus Christ. Thou therefore, my Son, be strong
in the Grace that is in Christ, Jesus. Often should we read and
meditate on the epistles to Timothy and Titus. But indeed the
whole divinely inspired Scripture is profitable for doctrine, &c., that
the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good
works. May God ever bless you and grant you good success by His
Holy Spirit."
After the Ordination service a candidate presented to
Bishop Jolly was confirmed by him.
One of the greatest preachers ofthe present day has divided
all human characters into three classes — first, those in whom
good predominates to such an extent that like the Baptist
they approach most nearly to perfection ; secondly, the great
mass of mankind in whose characters good and evil are mixed
in greater or less proportions ; and thirdly that class in whom
evil has a fatal predominance. We cannot read the letters
of Bishop Jolly without feeling that we are in the presence of
a Christian character of the highest kind. When not engaged
in his pubUc duties, his time was spent in study, meditation,
and prayer. From his lonely room at Fraserburgh arose for
his Church, and for the proud world without, the intercessions
of a truly saintly man.*
Bishop Jolly was wont to visit the congregations in his
diocese at least once every three years. He desired that the
candidates should be thoroughly prepared for confirmation.
He said —
" Since the Church now makes the personal susception of the
Baptismal engagements a requisite for Confirmation, it is no doubt
necessary in order to this that the candidates be of understanding
and discretion and have attained to actual devotion and an operative
sense of religion, and therefore very young children though in re
spect of their innocence, the fitter temples ofthe Holy Ghost, are
not, especially in these careless cold times, ordinarily fit for the
awful profession which they ate called to make in the presence of
God and the Church."
The Bishop held a Confirmation for Keith and Ruthven in
1802. In 1804 Mr. Murdoch had another invitation from Bishop
Macfarlane to migrate to the Diocese of Ross. The stipend
paid by the congregations of Keith and Ruthven was small
indeed, the pastor being dependent upon the fees received
* The excellent Memcir of Bishop Jolly by the Rev. Dr. Walker of Monymusk
is a book that should be in every house ; in this narrative we have to speak of
the Bishop mainly in relation to the pastor and congregation of Keith,

96 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
from pupils and donations sent to him through his Bishop,
-Very fatiguing too, sometimes, was the journey to Ruthven
when the roads were blocked with snow-drifts, from which
the presbyter and his horse were more than once with diffi
culty extricated. A desponding letter had been written by
Mr. Murdoch to Bishop Jolly in the beginning of 1804, and
these words in reply were intended to inspire with fresh cour
age the weary and fainting soldier of the Cross : —
" That your present situation is laborious and fatiguing, I well
know. But that by your continuance in it you are losing your time,
I am far from thinking. On the contrary, I apprehend that you are
laying it out to the very best advantage and amassing infinite treasure
of future glory and joy. Our time is only a step to eternity, and
that surely is the best way of passing it, which ensures the greatest
degree of endless bliss. 'To receive here our riches and consolation
is woeful. But to endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ
conformed to Him and His first followers in poverty and travel, des
picable as it may be in the estimation of a poor deluded world, is
grand and glorious in the eye of faith ! How are we a6fected by the
epistle for Sunday last, and that' for Sexagesima, with such like pas-
ages ! Alas ! we are not fit for nor worthy of what those choice
lights and vessels were called to do and suffer."
A Bishop too much given to study would hardly be aWe
to meet the requirements ofthe present day. Bishop Jolly
had occasional misgivings, lest he was giving up over much
time to study. He says in another part of the letter just
quoted —
" And this I feel very keenly, being habituated to study, that the
interruption of it makes me uneasy. This, however, I readily con
fess, is a fault in me, and I would caution every clergyman against
the excess that I perhaps am guilty of. It is all vanity and increase
of sorrow unless it be directed to a good end and made a good use
of. Two hours of the day so spent and blessed of God shall be
much more to the purpose, than my poring on from morning to night
and spending my time more like a student than a pastor."
Is it not the case that in the present" day the clergy, hard
pressed as they are by the claims of pastoral work, are pre
vented from giving due attention to self-improvement. Sel
dom have pastors now the same reasons for such misgivings
as those that troubled the saintly prelate in his retirement at
Fraserburgh. At the beginning of the century most clergy
men had two charges to serve, and complaints of neglect of
one or other of these were unfrequently made to the Bishop
of the Diocese. The following extract is taken from a letter
of October 6th, 1804, from the Rev. James Walker of Huntly
to the Rev. John Murdoch of Keith : —

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 97
" I believe there never was a poor man driven about and dashed
betwixt two good men as I have been for some time past. Because
I went once in the three weeks to Clova,* some ot the good folks '
here have been complaining, and sent their complaints to Aberdeen
against me for carelessness and neglect of them. Are they not very
grateful! Had Bishop Jolly known some of them as I have done
for near twenty years, I'm not certain if he would not have wished
a removal in hope that another clergyman would find them more
agreeable." .... "Mr. Niven wishes to have a Deacon
for Clova as soon as the Bishop can procure one . . . Mr. Niven
has laid off as much ground as will maintain a cow, and the peats
they could bring to the door in a barrow. Mr. Niven is to build a
house for the clergyman and give .j^io."
In the present day complaints are made when the Equal
Dividend is a pound or two less than the year before. Here
we see that it was intended to give the Deacon at Clova ;^io
a year, a house with land for a cow, and peats. Surely the
clergy ofthe nineteenth century cannot speak of the good old
times of their ecclesiastical forefathers.
Towards the close of 1804, Mr. Murdoch gave up the idea
of removing to the Diocese of Ross. Bishop Abernethy
Drummond had arranged that the Rev. Mr. Murray of Muc
halls should come to Keith in the place of Mr. Murdoch. The
latter would have been a great accession to the Ross Diocese,
as he could preach fluently in Gaelic. In 1805 Mr. Murdoch
undertook the additional charge of Fochabers, and Bishop
JoUy encouraged him thereto in these words : —
"It was generously good in you to undertake the additional charge
o( Fochabers, which I am afraid is rather too much for you, but
your good neighbours with whom you maintain so comfortable a
correspondence, will do what they can, I doubt not, to moderate it."
The Bishop proceeds to speak of a visit of his to the Rev.
Alexander Christie, —
" This week I have made a visit to your predecessor, poor afiiicted
Mr. Christie, whose tedious illness now leaves little hope of his re-
'covery. Journeying presses pretty hard upon me, and I feel fati
gued and exhausted by this little excursion."
Bishop Macfarlane was much disappointed when Mr. Mur
doch finally decUned to be transferred to the Diocese of
Ross, and in his disappointment he complained to Bishop
Jolly, who suggested that the Rev. Mr. IVIurray of Muchalls
might be prevailed upon to go to the western Diocese instead
of Mr. Murdoch. * Fifteen miles distant from Huntly.

98 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
In the year 1807 a new church was solemnly opened at
Keith, recourse being had again to the service used by Bis
hop Jolly at the opening of the church at Fraserburgh. The
Bishop forwarded to Keith the sermon which he had preached
at Fraserburgh, and Mr. Murdoch was directed to alter and
accommodate it to his purpose.
The new church opened at Keith, (m November Sth, 1807,
was accounted the finest Episcopal Church in the North, the
cost ofthe whole building having been a little over fflcxi.
Such a building had indeed a claim to be considered a
very fine edifice for the time.* Tradition has it that the
Church in which Mr. Murdoch officiated at Fochabers was
merely a thatched cottage. It must be noted, however, that
the Church quitted by the Keith congregation in 1808, humble
as it was, had been the witness of a historical event, viz., the
election of Bishop Jolly on the 14th February, 1798.
The new place of worship solemnly opened in 1807, was
not consecrated on account of some debt that still remained
upon the building.
Mr. Murdoch's life war one of hard toil ; on week-days he
taught a school, and by manual labour he strove to provide for
his family. A day's work in school was a much more serious
matter in those days than it is now when five or six hours
per diem is considered to^be a long enough strain upon the
attention of both teacher and scholar. Mr Murdoch's
school was opened every day about six or seven o'clock in
the morning, and was not closed until four o'clock in the
afternoon. The knowledge of this hard-wrought existence
caused Bishop Jolly to say in a letter of June 4th, 1810, —
" It gives me much pain, since the receipt ofyour letter, especially
to think of your toilsome situation. The time of your daily pede-
gogic task appears to me to be too long, by, at least, two hours and
a half. You ought therefore to abridge, in consideration of your
own health, and with equal advantage, as I would hope, upon the
whole, to your pupils. Yodr attention to them is but your second
ary employment, and yet it well accords with the primary, and has
its own great value, in the best point of view, that of God's good
will and pleasure, the only never falling source of joy and comfort
to us. Here you fix and hither draw all your cares and studies ;
convinced that the love of Christ will sweetly mitigate, if not alto
gether cast out, those fears and anxieties which are permitted mean
time for your trial and purification."
* A story is told of a zealous member of our Churchy whose ideas ofthe Church
had been associated with the humble buildings then in use. On a visit to the
capital of Scotland when walking in Princes Streetj some one pointed to him St.
John's Episcopal Church. Looking at it with undisguised admiration and plea
sure, he exclaimed — '* That is the Church at last."

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 99
At this time Confirmations were held only when there were
a sufficient number of candidates in all the churches of the
•diocese. This is evident from what Bishop Jolly says in this
same letter : —
"Our two senior brethren, when I applied to them, were
decidedly of opinion that my visit this season for the purpose of con
firmation would be premature, there being no candidates with them
ready. I am glad that it is otherwise with you. I could not,
however, very well proceed partially. And to appear where I had
nothing to perform, instead of animating, would, I'm afraid, in a
disheartening manner expose our already too visibly and lamentably
declining state. May our Divine Lord look upon us in His tender
mercy and send out his Spirit whose festival we are about to celebrate
to receive and renew us ! "
The Clergy were so thankful for bare toleration that it was
many years before the spirit of missionary enthusiasm im
planted in the reviving communion any very ardent wish to
extend her bounds by means of Home and Foreign Missions.
In 1812 the congregation at Crichie in Aberdeenshire
expressed a desire to have Mr. Murdoch sent to them as their
pastor ; there were, however, difficulties in the way, the prin
cipal objection being the apparent impossibility of securing
a worthy successor to Mr. Murdoch at Keith. Bishop JoUy's
letter to the latter on that occasion, and dated Fraserburgh,
March 12th, 1812, contains the following passage : —
" I humbly think that the objection on the side of the congrega
tion at Crichie might be easily removed ; but how to get over it in
respect to Keith, and its dependences, is a most puzzling difficulty,
which momentously interests you and me, united as we are, in the
most tremendous responsibility. I think of you with esteem for your
unwearied labours of love and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus
Christ, and at the same time with tender concern and solicitude for
your personal comfort and preservation, which ought to be cherished
to the utmost : while those infinite eternal motives preponderate ;
weighed against which every earthly thing is less than the dust of
the balance. At all times these are affecting and constraining ; but
now especially in the more particular view of our Saviour's Cross,
and the glory that follows it. Well, therefore, do I know that my
beloved brother, who lives by the faith of the Son of God, the Good
Shepherd, who gave His life for His sheep, will not leave in utter
¦destitution, as they must be, if he leave them, that portion of his
poor flock, which he has committed to his care, till He shall provi
dentially call him to greater good elsewhere, with the probable
prospect of a successor to him in his present charge of which there
is not the smallest just now. When that shall appear, his humble
servant, who is personally nothing in the case, and desires to have
no will of his own, will feel none of that painful reluctance which

loo The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
now possesses his heart. I hope that one of those young men whom
you are so laudably training, will at length, and ere long time pass,
let you go emeritus to a more easy station.
Note,
The letter in which these directions were given, and
dated July 4th, 1807, from Fraserburgh, gives an account
of the last hours and funeral of the Very Rev. John Skin
ner, " Tullochgorum," or " the Burns of the North." This
account is interesting, and though somewhat apart from the
present sketch, worthy of quotation, — " I attended," says the
Bishop, " the funeral of the venerable man, who so long and
so worthily stood in defence of our poor depressed Church.
His translation to a better world, where the Church is, in joy
ful rest and felicity, was gentle and easy in an uncommon
degree. He went to Aberdeen on the 4th of~June, and made
the journey in a single day with very litle fatigue. He had
a desire to be there, and wks vastly cheerful and happy till
on Friday preceding his death, his asthma rather increased,
and his hilarity of course was intercepted. On the day that
he died he ate his dinner at table, and continued in the
company, Mrs. Skinner from Forfar and her children being
at Berry bank, till about half an hour past five, when he
retired to his room, and before six sitting in his chair
breathed his last. The Bishop was with him, who with one
trial after another, is a good deal depressed. The interment
at Longside, which was on Friday, June 19th, was very mov
ing, the whole congregation, most of them baptised by him,
attending. The body was carried into the chapel, and lay
before the altar rails, while the first of the two Psalms, the
39th was sung, the Bishop having introduced it by a short
address to the people. The rest of the service was said in
the church-yard. Mr. Gumming who was deeply affected,.
began ; Mr. William Skinner read the Lesson in a very im
pressive manner ; and the Bishop concluded. The congrega
tion is to erect a sepulchral monument as some tribute to-
his memory, which deserves to be perpetuated. Of the
clergy, my neighbour Mr. Sangster, now senior of the
Diocese with Dr. Laing, Messrs. Tory, Cay, and Grieve
attended with your humble servant, who with the three in
vestments, walked in procession from the chapel to the
grave. May we all, in every step, so walk as that the grave
may be our happy bed of rest from our labour and travel,
and may we rise at the last day of endless joy and glory t
Meantime I fervently commend you and all your labours to
God's blessing."

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. loi
What an eloquent tribute is this letter of the Bishop's to
the past labours of the aged Confessor who was then laid in
his last resting place at Longside ! Deeply must the descrip
tion of the last solemn rites have affected the pastor of the
church at Keith, for there had been much sympathy between
him and the departed Presbyter, both being Hutchinsonians
and splendid Hebrew scholars. Dean Skinner in 1753 had
been imprisoned for six months at Aberdeen for reading the
Service of the Episcopal Church. A poet himself, and the
composer of the famous poem "Tullochgorum," he was a
friend and correspondent to our national bard Bums, though
the two never met. The foUowing lines by the Dean are to
be found in a " Poetical Epistle " from him to Burns, written
in reply to a letter from the latter : —
"Your bonnie bookie, line by line
I've read, and think it freely fine ;
Indeed, I darena ca't divine.
As others might ;
For that, ye ken, frae pen hke mine.
Wad no be right."

The letter from Bishop Jolly indicates the lofty ideal in
his mind as to the relations that should subsist between a
pastor and his flock. He continues, —
" The conclusion of both our letters is one and the same, for you
could not, in present circumstances, I am convinced, tear yourselT
away, and leave so many orphans and bleeding hearts behind you.
May the heart that was pierced with the spear for us all, bless and
reward your pastoral love and care, and soothingly heal your feeling
heart, which must at present have its peculiar agitation. But pray
from it, my dear Reverend Sir, for your poor Servant, who has his
own trials and lacerations, and is your most affectionate Brother."
. . We also realise from this how many were the trials that had
come upon the Church. Scarcity of pastors precluded the
possibility of change in the spiritual oversight of a parish, even
when such a change would have been entirely beneficial
both to priest and people. Mr. Murdoch's flock at Keith
were evidently strongly attached to their pastor, and his re
moval from their midst would indeed have been like that of
a father from his children, leaving " orphans and bleeding
hearts " behind him." '
The next event of importance in the history of the Keith
congregation was the purchase of an organ. In July, 1814,.
Mr. George Kynoch, a zealour member of the congregation,
not only took the initiative in securing a suitable instrument,.

•102 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
but personally acquired sufficient knowledge of its use to
¦constitute himself organist — a fact that indicated no smaU
amount of energy and perseverance under difficulties, *
The organ arrived at Keith in 1815. This was the first
"kist of whistles " that had been seen in the neighbourhood
since the Revolution, and great was the excitement caused
by its arrival. A week was occupied in the transit of the
organ from Peterhead, and many were the questions put to
the carrier, en route, as to his mysterious load.
Writing to Mr. Murdoch on September 26th, 1815, Bishop
Jolly, said, —
" My congratulation upon your erection of an Organ in your
¦Chapel. I could not have so long delayed, if I had not found
another channel, the best and shortest, to be sure, for conveying my
subscription for it. Although I had and still have some doubts as
to the supporting of it, I hope that they shall prove vain, and that
the good and pleasant use of it, as I pray^ shaU be permanent to
the Glory of God's great Name."
In 1815 Mr, John Bowdler and other friends ofthe Church
were endeavouring to formulate some scheme for the assist
ance of the struggling Church in Scotland. The Scottish
Bishops were communicated with, and questioned regarding
the number of souls in the congregations and the Churches
that might require to be enlarged or rebuilt. With reference
to this ecclesiastical census. Bishop Jolly wisely observed —
" It strikes me, that we ought to keep this investigation entirely
secret meanwhile, in order to preclude the jealousy, which such
things, as commonly misunderstood and mis-reprerented by the
retailers, are apt to excite among our neighbours, with whom we
earnestly desire to live very peaceably and quietly."
George III. died in 1820, During his reign the Church
had been to a great degree emancipated from her dis-
¦abilities. The last 28 years of his, prolonged reign were to
the Church a period of peace and progress.
Bishop Macfarlane, once Incumbent of Keith, died on
July 26th, 1819, and the Rev. David Low of Pittenweem was
unanimously elected as his successor, by the clergy of Ross
and Argyll. This election proved eventuaUy to be a great
boon to the Church, though at first it was a disadvantage to
the Diocese of Ross and Argyll to have again a non-resident
Bishop. Among the papers of Mr. Murdoch there has been
* Three of the grandsons of this gentleman are now, in 1889, Churchwardens
of Trinity Church, Keith, To the late Mr. George Kynoch, his son, the founder
of the firm that bears this name, the town is indebted for one of its staple in-
.duslries.

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. loj
preserved a short diary by a gentleman named Mr. C. Alilne.
This diary is interesting as giving an account of Bishop
Low's first appearance in his northern Diocese. Mr. Milne-
left Keith on June 23, 1820, reaching Elgin on the same
evening, where he stayed with Mr. Buchan at the Parsonage.
On the next night, Inverness was reached between 11 and 12.
"June 25th, 1820. — Called on Miss Duff at 10 o'clock, and was
kindly received by her and Mrs. Macfarlane. I was then introduced
to Mr. Fyvie, who showed me every attention.
" Bishop Low did not arrive here on Sunday as was expected.
He had intimated that he was to be at Inverness on the 2Sth inst.,
this greatly disconcerted their measures. On Monday, Mr. Fyvie,
Mr. Smith and myself went up in a gig to Dromnadrochat to meet
the Bishop and Mr. Walker, which accordingly we did. I could not
but be struck with the romantic scenery about Loch Ness. The
stupendous rocks almost overhanging the Lake are really sublime.
I had no conception of them before I saw them, and had not the
smallest idea that they were so stupendous, having never seen any
thing to compare with them. We arrived at Inverness the same
night. The Bishop is a tall slender man, thin faced . . . with
locks thinly scattered upon his forehead, he appears to be about
50, he has a very good voice. On Tuesday I was employed in read
ing ' Ellis OB Divine Things,' a very excellent book.
" Wednesday. — Went up to the chapel at Strathnaim, were there
was a Confirmation. The Bishop was much pleased with the con
gregation, etc. Although on a week day, the chapel was full ; and
on Sundays, I am told, it is crowded. 'The chapel and clergyman's
house are new, and very neat, considering everything. There were
a good many confirmed. Mr. Walker read the service, and after
confirmation, Mr. Mackenzie delivered a Gaelic discourse. We
dined with Mr. M'Intosh of Farr. Farr himself is a very old man,.
much troubled with an asthma. We came to Inverness the same
nigfat. " Thursday. — Confirmation in the chapel at Inverness. The
service was read by Mr. Walker, and some . . . grown up people
were confirmed. 'The congregation upon the whole seems to be-
very respectable ; they have a very neat organ, and a choir of
singing boys. 'The Bishop, Mr. Walker, and Mr. Fyvie wore the-
surplice. In the aftemoon I saw Mr. James Paterson, and heard
him examined.
"Friday. — Went to Mr. Pateison's at Lettoch in the aftemoon,.
who was from home at a baptism. Came to Inverness on Sunday
night, having been at the chapel of Ord. Not nearly so large a
congr^ation as Strathnairn, nor as good a house."
The accession of George IV. took place in 1820. The prin
cipal ecclesiastical event during the ten years of his reign was
the passing of the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act, a mat
ter whicb will be again referred to at a future time. The King

I04 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
visited Scotland in the autumn of 1822, receiving an enthusi
astic welcome from his Scottish subjects, none being more
loyal than the Scottish Bishops who were received at Holy-
rood. Times were changed, and the representatives of those
whose ecclesiastical ancestors had lost their all for their ad
herence to the House of Stewart, now voluntarily professed
allegiance to a sovereign, whose famUy they regarded as hav
ing been at last, in the Providence of God, purged of its
-usurpation. In 1823, Dr. Hobart, Bishop of New York, visited Scotland,
spending Christmas at Edinburgh, and the Epiphany of the
foUowing year at Aberdeen. Bishop Hobart met Bishop Jolly
at Aberdeen, who said he expected to find in the American
prelate a second Seabury. This distinguished ecclesiastic
pronounced the Bishop of Moray to be " one of the most
apostolic and primitive men he ever saw."
"You go," said he, " from the extremity of Britain to see the
falls of Niagara, and think yourself amply rewarded by the sight of
this singular scene in nature. If I had gone from Aniierica to Aber-
¦deen, and seen nothing but Bishop JoUy, as I saw him for two days,
I should hold myself greatly rewarded. In our new country we
have no such men, and I could not have imagined such without
seeing him. The race, I fear, is expired, or expiring, even among
you." *
The visit of Bishop Hobart led to the opening up of
the Lay question in the Church. Influenced by what
the American prelate said concerning the co-operation of
laymen in the Church in America, the Rev. John Skinner, son
of the late Primus, and then a Presbyter at Forfar, addressed
a circular to the bishops and clergy, advocating the admission
of the laity to certain branches of Church work. At that
time the Church was not prepared for the change. The
problem was at least partially solved by the establishment of
the Representative Church Council half a century later.
That Bishop Jolly regarded Bishop Hobart's visit as an
event of considerable importance appears from the foUowing
letter addressed to Mr. Skinner in February 1824 : —
" My dear Rev. Brother, —Our late highly pleasing interview with
good Dr, Hobart, the admirable Bishop of New York, must have
been very animating and inflaming to your ardent mind, as, in reality
it was so also to the less sanguine heart of your humble servant,
who hopes that he shall to good purpose retain the relish of it as
long as he lives. But now, my good Brother, permit me without
offence to say, that I think the exultation excited by the wondet-
* See Grub's Ecclesiastical History, Vol. IV,, page 175

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 105
fully gratifying visit sent to us as an incitement from Heaven, I
would say, has transported you rather out of measure. I plainly
perceived and felt for my own share that coming into contact with
so attractive a character gave an impulse to our hearts, and to
yours in particular, very powerfully moving. But truly, I did not
expect that your highly laudable zeal and earnest wish to excite some
degree of his devout fervour among us, would have issued so sud
denly in an attempt to do all things at once, which often terminates
in doing nothing. But in the present case, I hope not ; for surely,
without any external Monitor, our own consciences, in accord with
the Divine Word, loudly call upon us to be more fervent in spirit,
serving our Lord.
" For my own part I deeply deplore my deficiences in all respects,
and earnestly desire to repent and amend under the fullest con
viction that every stimulus, every facility and aid for the right per
formance of our several duties is richly provided on the side of our
Church, and that nothing is wanting but our diligent use and applica
tion of them. And that in respect of our Vineyard, we stand up
braided as of old, by the Divine expostulation, ' What could have
been done more to my Vineyard that I have not done in it? Where
fore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth
wild grapes?' Our paralysing sloth you contrast with the agitating
bustling stir of the Sectaries around us. But I well know that you
would have our activity animated by a very different Spirit. In
heavenly rest and quietness our work shall advance the faster and the
better. It is a striking circumstance, that in the building of God's
Temple, no noise of the Workmen's Tools was heard : and the Church
may most successfully be edified by the calm yet diligent and steady
application of the Labourers ; who are most like to their Divine
Master, when they do not make a great noise externally, but go on
in a laborious spirit and meek humility. For with this calm and
quiet state of mind the most flaming zeal may well consist, and in
deed, will necessarily be its constant attendant, devoutly solicitous
for the welfare of all, but ever busiest at hom^ While every
Bishop with due inspection, takes'care ofhis own proper Diocese,
declining to .be dXXor/JioeTrtoKOTros, and every Presbyter faithfully
and diligently tends his own proper cure, all must go well. , . ."
". . . . Where, for instance, as in the lamentable dwindled
and diminished Diocese of Moray, there are only three presbyters,
and they well-tried worthy men, of long standing, who by personal
and pastoral care, have made full proof of their ministry, the Bishop
esteeming each of them better than himself, would it not be proud
parade and the most ridiculous vanity to call them together, that
they may be charged to do what they already do with earnest appli
cation! In such case, personal clerical conversation appears altogether
sufficient for exhorting and comforting one another, with epistolary
correspondence, as need requires, or occasions may be given ; mutual
prayer uniting and binding them together every day by the heart.
Yet, certainly, where it is with propriety practicable, Diocesan

io6 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
Synods, frequent meetings, and clerical conferences are highly de
sirable, coal kindling coal, and fraternal intercourse, well tnanaged,
productive of great advantage, while all love as brethren pitiful and
courteous. "But now the new model, after the fashion of America, which
your letter holds out, I must acknowledge does greatly astonish
me. It was not ease to my heart to find from your worthy
Bishop's information, that what was so disgusting to the great
and good Bishop Seabury, but what the state of things in
America at that time rendered in some measure unavoidable,
hns been rendered by the over-ruling hand of God rather of
advantageous tendency. But here, where our civil state is so hap
pily different, the introduction of lay influence into our ecclesiastical
scale would make our American brethren themselves, who felicitate
our primitive purity upon the comparison, greatly wonder at our
levity, and render us totally dissimilar to our nearer neighbour of
England and Ireland, whose good liking it is our duty to conciliate
as much as we can consistently with our situation and the mainten
ance of primitive practices, of which as a little body stripped of all
secular ties and impediments, it is our duty and our wisdom to ren
der ourselves a pattern, instead of assimilating somewhat nearer, as
it would be thought, to the Lay-elders ofthe kirk. Whatever advan
tages might be derived from such a scheme, we have already withitt
our grasp, if we will only stretch out our arms to embrace them.
Every clergyman may, and ought, from time to time, to account to
the Bishop for the complete number and particular state of his
charge (at which I, myself in my small circle, aim ; but the excellent
and amirable Bishop of Aberdeen upon a much larger and better
scale) and by comparing notes, the Bishops might speedily exhibit
and tabulate the whole ; upon which due observations might be
made, tending to improvement and good progress, God direct the-
hearts, and strengthen the hands of all concerned ! Let everything
be done that can be well devised. Only let our Canons stand stable
and lasting, like the laws of Sparta, till He return who was at the
head of their enactment ! Such was the wise policy of Lycurgus.
In stability is strength, in fickleness is frailty. Greatly averse was-
your ever dear and memorable Father to lay management, even so
much as that of Vestrymen in a congregation. The longer I live,
the more I lament the lass we have suffered by his translation to a
better world. The lively likeness of him which from one of my
Copies of your Annals, hangs in my Closet, excites the warm
emotions of nfty heart, while I revereiitly kiss it in affectionate
veneration for his Memory ! May we tread in his steps, and through
the Mercy of our Lord, follow him to Paradise, where all is peace
and all is joy. I trust that I have written nothing offensive in tire-
somely scrawling all this, to tell my opinion. Pray God grant
me a better understanding in all things, who am. My dear Rev
erend Sir, your affectionate Brother and Servant, ALEXANDER
Jolly. "

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 1 07
Bishop Jolly speaks of Lycurgus the great Spartan legis
lator, who, having exacted a promise from the citizens to leave
his laws unchanged until he should return again, left Sparta
to return no more. Had the Bishop said that the Articles
of the Faith once for all delivered to the saints, were to
remain unchallenged till Christ Himself returned to earth, the
reference to the laws of Lycurgus would be easily understood.
But to say that the Canons of the Church, some of -which
were undoubtedly enacted for a temporary purpose, should
remain for ever changeless, is a very different thing. These
it has been found necessary to alter and extend, several times
since Bishop Jolly lived and wrote, and as times and circum
stances change, so doubtless will they be changed again and
again, the danger of too frequent alteration being to some
extent guarded against by the fact ofthe initiative with regard
to the calling of General Synods being left to the Bishops of
the Church.
Primus John Skinner, and Bishop JoUy were not quite
without reason in hesitatiug to admit the laity to the
Councils of the Church, at least until after mature delibera
tion. About fifty years after the letter above referred to was
written, a distinguished Irish Prelate addressing a Scottish
audience, remarked that in his Church a paradox had evolved
itself, the laity were taking care of theology, while the charge
of finance was left to the clergy, adding, " Don't follow our
example." The same day moreover, a Colonial Bishop
cautioned Scottish Churchmen against the abuses of her
Vestry System which tended, in his opinion, to damp the zeal
and ardour of the clergy. But while all this is true, there was
much to say in favour of the proposal of Mr. Skinner of
Forfar, and if Bishop Jolly were living now, we may be sure
he would be the first to recognise with thankfulness the noble
work being done by the laity in the Representative Council
of the Church. The reference to Primus Skinner, will also be
noted as affectionate in tone, though the latter had thrown
not a few obstacles in the way of Bishop Jolly's Consecration.
In the following letter written from Fraserburgh and dated
May 1.9th, Rogation Tuesday, 1822, Bishop Jolly arranged
with Mr. Murdoch, for whom he evidently felt a warm regard,
for a visitation of the Moray Diocese, —
' "Solicitude fpr the supply ofthe Duffus Congregation in which
I am sure that you concur with me, induces me to hasten my journey
westward. The proposal for its benefit will I hope meet your
approbation and that of our other brethren. In which case, I pur
pose, God willing, to receive Mr. Hagar into the Diaconate, while
H

io8 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
Mr. Pressley's Presbyteration, as I hope, shall take place in Elgin,
on Tuesday the 2Tid of July next. I should be glad to meet you at
Mr. Shand's, where I hope fo arrive at i p.m. or earlier, on
Monday the Ist, and so we could proceed, slender as lue all are, in
the same chaise to Elgin. That I would leave on Wednesday in
time to take a plain, quiet family dinner with Mrs, Murdoch on
that same day ; for the accomplishing of which you will have to order
the Keith chaise to meet us in Fochabers about I p,m., taking the
Elgin for our vehicle thither. Thus early I wish to give you warn
ing, in most humble submission to Him whose Grace in all be our
Guide and Guard. ..."
When this letter was written the Very Rev. Hugh Buchan
of Elgin was Dean of the Diocese of Moray, and in 1823, as
the Dean was then very infirm. Bishop Jolly was desirous
to raise Mr Hagar of Duffus to the Priesthood, with the view
of lightening the duties of the Elgin Incumbent. Another
letter to the same Presbyter, dated November 24th, 1823,
exhibits the practical interest taken by the Bishop even in the
domestic concerns of his clergy, — '¦
"Do now favour me with a few lines, telling me how you are
getting on (God strengthen you !) and how your whole family does.
My hearty love and good-will to them all. God ever bless and keep
them ! Kindly receive the accompanying note, drawing £'^, as a
shamefully small winter present to them. Still we are kept in
expectation of Royal Bounty. But we must wait for it as becomes
men mortified to the world, cultivating m our poor state, that poverty
of spirit, which has the promise of the Kingdom of Heaven I I
humbly commend you to God's protection and beg your daily
prayer." The year 1829 was remarkable for the passing through the
Lords of the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act, during the
administration of the Duke of Wellington, and its final
sanction by the Sovereign. According to an old residenter
a public meeting took place in Keith, at which the minister
of the Established Church spoke in favour of this measure,
while Mr. Murdoch and others spoke against it. At that time
the established minister of Keith was the Rev. James Thom
son, and it is to his credit that he should have aUied
himself with the cause of religious liberty. Strange it is that
so good and sagacious a man as Mr. Murdoch, should have
been hostile to the Bill. Surely the recollection of the
sufferings endured by his own Communion during the pre
ceding century, should have made it a cause of rejoicing that
the Roman Catholics were to be set free from like disabilities.
Probably Mr. Murdoch was influenced by the fact that in the
preceding century. Dr. Abernethy Drummond, afterwards
Bishop of Edinburgh (and his benefactor when he first came

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 109
to Keith), had stirred up the people against the repeal of the
penal laws against the Roman Catholics. This was in 1779,
and it will always redound to the honour of the Established
Church of Scotland that her leading divines favoured this
just measure even in the face of the outrages and threats of
the opposing mob. For the same reason it will be
regretted that good Bishop Drummond, then a Presbyter,
should by his writings have stirred up fanaticism, and
thus to some extent rendered himself responsible for the post
ponement for half a century of what was an act of simple
justice to a large section of our fellow subjects. The final
passing ofthe Roman Catholic Relief Bill in 1829 under the
administration ofthe Iron Duke, was another laurel added to
his fame.
In the year 1832 the church erected at Keith in 1807 was
consecrated by Bishop Low, — acting for Bishop JoUy, — who,
from old age, was unable to be present. The day chosen
was August Ist, or Lammas Day. Besides the Bishop there
were present the Very Rev. J. Walker, Dean of Moray ; the
Very Rev. A. Shand, Dean of Aberdeen ; the Rev. Messrs.
J. Murdoch, Charles Fyvie, Alex. Bruce, John Taylor, Arthur
Ranken, Laurie, Cole, George Milne, and an English clergy
man of the name of Campbell. There were 32 communi
cants, and the offertory amounted to £1.
On Tuesday, the 12th day of August, 1834, Mr. Murdoch's
ministry was cheered by the opening of another new church,
viz., that of Fochabers. In Mr. Murdoch's diary, which will
be referred to hereafter, he states that the Duke and
Duchess of Gordon were present at the opening ceremony, —
the consecration was postponed, — and that there was a full
assembly. The organ was ptayed by Miss Wagstaff, and the
offertory, amounting to ;£i3, 15s. 2d., must have been a valu
able help to the Incumbent of Keith, not overburdened at any
time with this world's goods.
A new clergyman was now appointed at Fochabers, the
Rev. W. . Pitt M'Farquhar, and the connection with Keith
was severed. To the sorrow of Bishop Jolly it was proposed
to use the English Communion Office at Fochabers. Writ
ing from Fraserburgh to Mr. Shand of Arradoul, on Nov.
6th, 1834, and quoting from a letter he had received on the
subject from the Duchess of Gordon, the Bishop says, —
" Her Grace, to what I wrote, honoured me by her return, in very
kind terms. October 14th. — ' I hasten to acknowledge your truly
kind and pastoral letter, and to offer the grateful and heart-felt
thanks of the Duke of Gordon and myself for your affectionate

no The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
benediction to us and to our clergyman. It is our earnest wish to
do everything that we conceive to be best for promoting the interest
and extension of the Episcopal Church in Scotland, and I trust my
venerable Bishop will receive with that kindness and impartiality
which distinguishes his Christian character {overlook and pardon,
inserts the Bishop] the assurance that it is with this view that
the Duke and I desire that the whole of the services of the Church,
as contained in the Common Prayer-Book, should be adopted in our
chapel. We do not believe the older Communion Service differs in
any material point from that of the Church of England ; but as we
have been more accustomed to the latter, which is also used in many
Episcopalian chapels in Scotland, and our numerous friends and
servants from England, who, with the family of Mr. Gordon
of Cairnfield, are in the same case, and feel the distraction of
thought occasioned by the different order in which the prayers are
placed, we earnestly beg you will not refuse to receive our con
gregation under your Episcopal charge if we continue to use the
Communion Office as in England, and in the Diocese of Edinburgh,
in which I was confirmed a member of the Episcopal Church of
Scotland.'" To this letter Bishop Jolly goes on to say that he replied
as follows : —
" Great comfort I feel in declaring that the Branch of the Holy
Catholic Church to which I belong, is in lull communion with the-
united Church of England and Ireland, clearly implying that we
embrace her Liturgy, and consider it in substance and with full
effect, the same with our own, which we have canonically ascertained
to be specially characteristic of the Scotch Episcopal Church. A
wistful eye was had to it (the Caroline, I mean), in the last review
of the Liturgy, and it would have been gladly adopted by the
worthy Fathers and Doctors of England that then were, had the
genius of the unsettled times (to which the present wear too sad a
similarity) permitted. In our depressed state, the attention of the-
primitively intelligent was readily drawn to that Liturgy to which
the worthies of England helped to furnish us, but were not worthy
of it. To heal (when a time of healing, perfectly consistent with
our highly monarchical principles arrived) the unseemly division,
dangerous as division ever is, whicn the anomalous mission from-
England had occasioned, our Bishops conceded, as terms of peace
and sweet fellowship, that in those congregations were the English
altar service had been used, it might be retained, as our ijth Canon
runs. At the present day, four Bishops use the Scotch Office, and
two the English. In my small circle the former has been used time
immemorial. " Three years ago when I made my final visits for Confirmation
(as seems to be the good will of God) in Elgin, my excellent friend.
Sir Archibald,* informed me that some few there suggested
* Sir Archibald Dunbar.

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century, in
and expressed desire of change in that respect, which, however,
could not be made without the Bishop's consent and concurrence ;
and so it became requisite that I should consider and declare my
mind upon it. After I had made the best remarks that I could,
with all calm deliberation, I decidedly said, that I was from the best
dictate of my conscience, utterly averse to the change, and could
not go along with it, or consent to it. Sir Archibald told roe that
Mr. G. of C, for whom and for all his father's family I retain affection
ate regard, was particularly desirous of the change, that he might
communicate in Elgin, for that he could not in Enzie. Lord
Medwyn was then in the corner, and hearing of Mr. G.'s difficulty,
proposed to send him a book that he imagined might help him over
it, saying at the same time, for himself, that although the other
was now universally used in Edinburgh, he, in his best judgment,
gave the preference to the former. So did the profoundly reflect
ing Archbishop Sharp,* a man of the most sterling casuistry. And
so, let me add, did my late worthy colleague. Bishop Sandford, who
at the consecration of Bishop Skinner (at all our Episcopal con
secrations, the use of the Scotch Communion Office is enjoined),
¦expressed his thoughts of attempting to restore it.
" But now the case at Gordon Castle, upon which your Grace's
observations are strikingly lucid, stands, as I am inclined to view it,
in a different predicament from that in Elgin, or any other such con-
.gregation. It is one thing to thrust out an Office from where it has
been long received and used ; and another to meet an Office where
it had not been found before, and embrace it there. And our Church
accordingly has provided for both cases. . . . Pardon me now
for again running into length. But give me leave to advert to dear
Mr. G.'s case, which is of more difficulty, and pains me much.
Your Graces never declined to receive by our Office where you
found it. He on the contrary, pleads conscience for withdrawing
from it totally, and thereby clecides that it is sinful in itself and
separates himself from Communion with that Church, which in
doctrine and use believes it to be sound and salutary. But such is
that perfect Unity of the Church (for which our Divine Redeemer
prayed and shed his infinitely precious blood to purchase the grace
necessary to maintain and preserve it), that if we separate ourselves
from one sound part, we separate ourselves from the whole ; for it
is a whole made up of similar parts. Wherein its essential Unity
consists (although it runs one and the same through the Book of
God from beginning to end), we find condensed in a single verse of
Divine Inspiration, Acts ii. 42, where we find that in the truly
Apostolic Church, its faithful members " continued steadfastly in the
Apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in
prayers." "... I earnestly wish that Mr. G. (whom I affectionately
regard) . . . may with sure comfort to his heart, maintain the unity
of the Spirit in the bond of peace ; and so at least feel no pain or
* Archbishop Sharp of York.

112 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
disquiet of mind for having mutilated the Congregation of Arradoul,
where his fathers so long worshipped (and with comfort to my heart
I have repeatedly seen his father and mother so employed there), and
by his discouraging desertion, thrown damp and distrust upon those
who adhered to it, or made but one little one or weak brother to
stumble— not a light consideration surely. Meantime he is in the
Diocese of Aberdeen, and cannot so pass over its bound, without a
breach of ecclesiastical Order. And so the case in all spiritual pro
priety rests with Bishop Skinner."
In 1828 a General Synod met at Laurencekirk to revise the
Code of Canons of 181 1, in which permission was given to
retain the use of the English Communion Office in all con
gregations where the said Office had been previously in use,
no alterations or interpolations being allowed. The 26th
Canon of 1828 enacted that the approbation ofthe Bishop of
the Diocese was sufficient to authorise a change from one
office to another ; and " The clause forbidding the Scotch
Office to be laid aside, unless by the authority ofthe College
of Bishops was omitted." The letter already referred to,
shows that Bishop Jolly acted most wisely in at once agree
ing to the use of the English Office at Fochabers. The diffi
culties at Elgin and Arradoul would have been easily rectified
had both Comriiunion Offices been put upon a footing of
equality, and had the Incumbent of a Church been permitted
to use both Communion Offices at different times. This
liberty would have prevented the mutilation of the Arradoul
congregation, over which Bishop Jolly utters a lamentation.
We gather from this epistle too that the Bishop was in very
infirm health, several years having elapsed since he was able
to visit his Diocese, so that in an Episcopal Synod held at
Edinburgh on August 9th, 1837, it was resolved in the event
of Bishop Jolly's death to conjoin the Diocese of Moray with
that of Ross and Argyll. A copy of the Minutes of this
Synod, signed by James Walker, Bishop and Primus, and
Bishops WiUiam Skinner, and David Low, was found among
Mr. Murdach's MSS., the following sentences having refer
ence to the Diocese of Moray : —
" For as much as the Bishops of Moray and Brechin refuse to
resign, but have each consented to allow a free election of an assist
ant Bishop and successor, the Synod have maturely considered and
discussed the peculiarly difficult position in which the College of
Bishops is thus placed : they feel that they have only a choice of
difficulties, and in humble dependence on Almighty God they feel
it to be their duty to allow a mandate to be issued to the Clergy of
-Brechin. , . . The Synod does not propose to issue a mandate
to the Clergy of Moray, because they are of opinion, that the few

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 113
Congregations in that Diocese, shall- on the death of the present
Bishop be re-united to Ross as formerly,"
The financial question also influenced the Episcopal Synod
towards this decision, the provisions of the Episcopal Fund
only extending to six Bishops, and it was intended that Bishop
Jolly's share should be aUotted after his death to the Diocese
of Glasgow, which by an enactment of this same Synod was
again constituted a separate See. Having experienced the
advantage of being under the Episcopal superintendence of
the saintly Bishop Jolly and of having a Diocesan of their own,
the clergy of Moray did not welcome the proposed change.
Bishop Jolly died on St. Peter's Day (June 29th), 1838,
none but God and His good angels being near at the moment
of his departure. The life of the departed Prelate had been
one of prayer and of close intercourse with his God ;
and through all generations to come his simple mode
of life and apostolic conversation will be a rebuke to all proud
parade and worldly display. To an end so peaceful 'as
his, for he was found when dead with his hands crossed upon
h,s breast, the words of Keble in his poem on St. Peter's Day
would well apply —
" The prayer is heard — else why so deep
His slumber on the ev^ of death ?
And wherefore smiles he in his sleep
As one who drew celestial breath ? "
The clergy of the Diocese of Moray forthwith tendered an
address to the Synod of Bishops suggesting that Moray should
still be kept a separate Diocese and that Inverness and Strath
nairn should be added to that See. Acknowledging the receipt
of the address, the Primus writing to Dean Walker, Huntly,
stated his objections to the proposal of the clergy, by
which it was made to appear as if Moray was an extensive
Diocese. It appears too from this letter of the Primus that
before his death Bishop Jolly had signified his approval of
the arrangements made by the Synod of Bishops. "There can
be little doubt that the Bishops were acting most wisely. It
will be seen nevertheless how much the clergy were disap
pointed, from the following quotation from a letter from Dean
Walker, to Mr. Murdoch, dated July 26th, 1838 :—
" The more I think of this arrangement I caniiot but the more
sincerely regret it. Indeed I wonder our late Venerable. Bishop did
not apprise us of what was intended to be done with our Diocese
after his death before he entered into the arrangement. I cannot
help saying that they have dealt heavy measure to the poor Diocese.
If Bishop Low be appointed our Diocesan, I feel he will be among

114 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
the last Bishops of Moray. Now why should we be refused a Bishop
resident, when through the favour of a good Providence we have one
of our own number of unexceptionable qualifications for the office?
Mr. Bigsby was so convinced of the reasonableness of our address
that he left a proxy with me to vote for him."
The Moray Clergy were not only to meet disappointment,
they were even to incur censure for what they had done.
Most likely the clergyman of their own number whom they
wished to see elected their Diocesan was the Rev. Mr.
Fyvie of St. John's, Inverness, it being natural that they
should think a Bishop resident at Inverness would be able to
do more for the Diocese than one residing at Pittenweem
in Fifeshire. It might have been deemed sufficient to point
out the difficulties in the way of granting their petition to the
Moray clergy who were evidently unaware that Bishop Jolly
had agreed to the new arrangement before his dea,th. To
censure all the clergy of the Diocese was certainly an extreme
step to take. The following is the resolution of the Bishops
containing the censure : —
Edinburgh, Sept. I, 1838, — "The Bishops having assembled in
Episcopal Synod this day, had before them a Memorial (rom the
clergy of Moray, subscribed also by Messrs. Fyvie and Mackenzie.
They have seen Mr. Fyvie and conversed with him on the subject.
Having therefore duly considered the whole case, they are decidedly
and unanimously of opinion that the said clergy have acted (under
some strong misapprehension doubtless) in an irregular and un-
canonical manner. In a Diocese vacant in ordinary circumstances,
the clergy may certainly meet by order of their Dean to petition for
o. Mandate of Election, but they have no right to meet for any pur
pose of Diocesan business without the cognisance and consent ofthe
Primus. Still less are the clergy, or any of them, entitled, under
any conceivable circumstances, to new arrange or new model their
Dioce.se, separating and adding congregations from other Dioceses.
In all cases and under all circumstances this jurisdiction belongs
incontestably to the College of Bishops ; and we cannot allow it to
be encroached upon in any way without a deep dereliction of duty.
In thus expressing our opinion, which implies censure to a certain
extent, we do it with all due respect and regard both generally and
individually, towards our Reverend Brethren. We have to attend
to the government of the whole Church, and cannot always give
equal satisfaction to each portion. In what we did however on the 9th
August, 1837, we did al! which the circumstances ot the Church then
permitted. Moray was only known to us, and to her deceased
BLshop, with whom the Primus was in constant correspondence, as
consisting of four small congregations. We therefore with his full
consent determined to re-unite those congregations to Ross, and as
they were in the time of Bishop Petrie and in the time of Bishop
Macfarlane, when they were separated in opposition to the most

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 115
¦decided protest of the Primus, certainly the ablest administrator of
his time. We intended no injustice. We cannot conceive that we
have done any to those congregations by replacing them in the con
nection from which they were then rather rashly separated.
" The Church in the North is as dear to us as the Church in the
South, and we will do all in our power to attend to its interests.
Episcopal duties have been fully performed this season ; we will
take care, God willing, that Moray notwithstanding be fully visited
again next year : and when the circumstances permit, we shall be
most happy to see in that quarter a resident Bishop. In the mean
time having expressed our sentiments on a very important encroach
ment on Church discipline, and having done so with feelings of the
most genuine Christian meekness, we trust that our Reverend
Brethren will receive our reproof and the reasons thereof in the same
.spirit ; that they will exert themselves to put an end to that agitation
which has been rather rashly excited, and thai they will co-operate
¦with us in promoting by God's blessing the influence ofthe truth, in
Unity of Spirit, in ihe Bond of Peace, and in Righteousness of Life."
(Signed) James Walker, D.D., Primus.
Patrick Torry, D.D. , Bishop.
W. Skinner, D.D., Bishop.
David Low, LL.D., Bishop.
Michael Russel, LL.D., Bishop.
David Moir, A.M., Bishop.
The Diocese of Moray was in this way again united to the
Diocese of Ross and Argyll, entirely in opposition to the
wishes of the Moray clergy. Bishop Low now becoming
Bishop of Moray, Ross, and Argyll.*
How much the Church Society was required in the Diocese
-of Moray will be seen from the information given in the
diary of the Rev. J. Murdoch, extending from the year 1824
to 1849. This document gives an account of Mr. Murdoch's
¦clerical income from every source, and is interesting as show
ing the financial condition of our country charges before the
formation of " The Scottish Episcopal Church Society." A
good deal of Diocesan and local information is interspersed
* A General Synod met at Edinburgh on August 29th, 1838, three days
before the foregoing reproof had been issued by the Episcopal Synod. This
¦General Synod in the aist Canon enjoined the use ofthe Scottish Office at the
opening of General Synods as well as at the Consecration of Bishops. ^ The 40th
C^non ordered the formation of a Society to be called the Scottish Episcopal
Church Society, the objects of which were — " (i.) To provide a fund for aged and
infirm clergymen or salaries for their assistants, and general aid for congrega
tions struggling with pecuniary difficulties. (2.) To assist Candidates for the
ministry in completing their theological studies. (3.) To provide Episcapal School
masters, books, and tracts for the poor. (4.) To assist in the formation or enlarge-
rnient of Dic^cesan Libraries."

1x6 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
among the various entries. Mr. Murdoch's income accrued
from three different sources — (l) From the charges of Keith,
Ruthven, and Fochabers ; (2) From the school taught by
him ; (3) From gifts bestowed by individuals, either directly
or through the Bishop of the Diocese. It will be seen from
this, how small were the offertories and contributions from
the individual incumbencies under Mr. Murdoch's charge,
and how much he was dependent upon the gifts of faithful
Churchpeople, not only in Scotland, but in England as weU.
Many of Mr. Murdoch's scholars paid no fees at all, and the
money received from the congregation at Ruthven would
scracely be sufficient to meet the expenses of his weekly or
fortnightly journey to the three congregations of Ruthven,
Keith, and Fochabers. After 1834, Fochabers had a clergy
man of its own ; and on October 4th, 1835, Mr. Murdoch
officiated at Ruthven for the last time, services there being
after that time discontinued. The state of Mr. Murdoch's
health rendered this imperative. Tradition has it that there
were about 40 souls in the congregation of Ruthven at that
time, and it is to be regretted that the Bishop of the Diocese
stiould have been unable to find some other way of continuing
local ministrations for their benefit. It must have been a deep
trial to the pastor when compeUed to give up this charge to
which he had been ordained, and to officiate at which he
had journeyed so frequently across the Balloch Hill. In a
window of the Farm House of Birkenburn, a candle was
sometimes placed when the darkness came on, to guide the
traveller over the hill as he returned frofn the Sunday ser
vices at Ruthven. The only portion of our Liturgy now
heard there, is the solemn office for the burial of the dead,
when some member of our Church is laid in' his last resting-
place, and the " Wow " of Ruthven tolls out its sad refrain—
" Come hame, come hame."
The following table shows Mr. Murdoch's official income
from 1824 to 1849, after 1835 the congregational income
referring to Keith alone. It will interest members of the-
Representative Church Council : —

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 117

Local Income

Year.
from
From otner
Total.
Congrega
ions.
Sources.
1824-25
;^I6 9
0
/44 7
3
£60 16 3
- 1825-26
15 6
7
38 11
0
53 17 7
1826-27
IS S
VA
68 19
10
84 5 sVz
1827-28
16 19
10
46 12
6
63 12 4
1828-29
26 16
9
94 14
0
121 10 9
1829-30
20 12
3
67 17
0
88 9 3
1S30-31
• 16 1
3
65 15
0
81 16 3
1831-32
19 19
8
74 8
0
94 7 8
1832-33
23 12
I0>^
81 13
6
105 6 41^.
1833-34
28 7
10.^
59 7
6
87 15 4K
1834-35
32 9
2
177 5
0
209 14 2
1835-36
IO 2
6
76 0
0
86 2 6
1836-37
II 5
^'A
59 17
6
71 2 8>i
1837-38
12 16
5
80 17
6
93 13 II
1838-39
11 17
1
95 18
6
107 15 7
1840-41
14 16
4
111 7
6
126 3 10
1841-42
12 9
3
99 14
0
112 3 3
1842-43
10 4
I
126 19
9
137 3 10
1843-44
II 7
6
104 3
7
115 11 1
1844-45
10 9
II
140 16
S
151 6 4
1845-46
10 14
I'A
90 15
3
IOI 9 6;^
1846-47
9 17
0%
99 0
0
108 17 oj4
1847-48
14 10
10 '
78 14
0
' 93 4 10
1848-49
3 19
OJ^
148 0
6
151 19 6%
The accounts quoted were reckoned from Whitsunday in
one year to Whitsunday in the following year.
In 1834 the comparatively large total occurs of £2CX),
14s. 2d, the increase arising from a legacy of .^50 left
to Mr. Murdoch by Dean Shand of Arradoul, and iJ6o^
left to the Keith pastor and his family by the Rev. Mr.
Cruickshank of Muthill. It will be observed also that a
marked improvement took place in the stipend after the-
inauguration of the Church Society in 1838. Previous to
that date the income from other than local efforts came from
such sources as : — The Edinburgh Fund, the Aberdeen Fund
(probably Dr. Anderson's, the Bishop of the Diocese), the
Regium Donum, the Episcopal Fund, Friendly Society, and
private donors.
This statement also proves how greatly the Incumbencies^
in the Diocese of Moray have altered for the better in respect
ii8 The Church of Keith in the Nineteeth Century.
of self-sustaining financial power. The Church Society un
doubtedly did splendid work in its day.
In 1833 Mr. Murdoch discontinued teaching, as the
¦school and the working of his three charges conjointly
were becoming too severe a tax upon his physical
strength. He was now afflicted by a severe inward
trouble, which sometimes caused him dreadful agony ; on
one occasion several medical men attending to perform a
painful operation, when, as he states in his diary, he was
almost rescued from the "jaws oi death," There was then
no " Aged and Infirm Clergy Fund" to give relief, and so,
though almost overwhelmed with the " burden and heat of
the day," the dauntless Christian soldier struggled bravely on.
Bishop Jolly, as appears from his letters, never summoned
his clergy to meet in Diocesan Synod. In 1839 Bishop Low
assembled the clergy of Moray, Ross, and Argyll, in a
Diocesap Synod which met at Elgin. The Bishop himself
-presided, and received from each of the clergy a statistical
account of the state of their respective congregations. Mr.
Murdoch, who was present, reported in regard to Keith that
"the number ofthe souls under his pastoral charge was 105,
the average number of baptisms annually 5, marriages 3,
deaths 4, persons catechised 12, and regular communicants
40." The clergy present signed the Canons enacted in the
previous year, and a Diocesan Committee for the Northern
District was formed in connection with the Scottish Episco
pal Church Society, the Very Rev. Charles Fyvie, Dean of
Moray and Ross, betng appointed Secretary.
In 1840, the Diocesan Synod met at Inverness under the
ipresidency ofthe Dean, when similar statistical returns were
made by the various clergy of the Diocese.
On the 30th of June, 1841, Bishop Low held a Visitation
-ofhis clergy at Ballachulish, in the Diocese of Argyll.
On the 17th of August, 1843, the clergy of Moray, Ross,
and ArgyU, met in Synod in St. John's Church, Inverness,
¦under the presidency of Dean, Fyvie. The Rev. A. Ewing
in this Synod, moved : — " That this Synod express their desire
that there should be no diversity of Office between this
'Church and the united Church of England and Ireland in the
administration of the Holy Communion, and that a memorial
be presented to the Bishops, by the Dean, in the name of
this Synod, respectfully praying them to take all necessary
steps to effect this purpose, by the abolition of Canon XXL"
"This motion, " having been seconded by the Rev. J. D. Hull,

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 119
Huntly, was unanimously approved of and passed." If Mr.
Murdoch had been present at this Synod, he would certainly
haye made a most energetic protest against this motion, for
he had always used the Scottish Office at Keith and Ruthven.
How much would it have grieved the heart of good Bishop
JoUy, had the clergy of Moray in his day presented such a
memorial to the Bishops of the Church ? Four years after
this, Mr. Ewing (afterwards Bishop Ewing), might have-
heard a voice speaking to him from over the '• Western
w^ers," in these exulting and prophetic words, —
' ' Where now the sons of havoc
Upon thine altars tread.
Thine own Liturgic service
Shall bless the Cup and Bread.

Save only from the spoiler.
That pure and ancient rite ;
In Scotland's Altar-service,
All churches must unite."
At another Synod of Moray and Ross, held at Inverness
on July 3rd, 1844, Bishop Low was himself present, and pre
sided, the business being chiefly of a routine description ;
and when the Synod was over, a meeting of the Diocesan
Association of the Church Society was held in the same
place. In 1845, Bishop Low was again present at Inverness, and
duly constituted the Synod of Moray, Ross, and ArgyU, for
a special purpose. The Rev. J. D. Hull, of Huntly, just re
ferred to, had been summoned to the meeting to appear before
his Reverend brethren, to account for certain irregularities of
which he stood accused. Mr. Hull had, it seems, associated
himself in his spiritual work with some clergy who had lately
thrown off their allegiance to the Scottish Episcopal Church,.
and had officiated in their churches, and allowed them to offici-
^ ciate in his. The Bishop read his declaration "of Mr. Hull's
separation from the Episcopal Communion, warning the
faithful against ecclesiastical communion with him ; and ex
pressing a hope that no Bishop of the united Church of Eng
land and Ireland, or of the Protestant Episcopal Church in
America, will henceforth receive any clergymen who have
officiated in Scotland, without letters from its Bishops."'
" This Declaration was unanimously adopted, and ordered
to be made public. It was then proposed by the Rev. W.
C. A. Maclaurin, and seconded by the Rev. A. Ewing, that a
Resolution as appended, should be attached to the said

12 0 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
Declaration, protesting against Mr. Hull's censure of the
clergy for dishonest subscription of the Articles," This was
passed unanimously, Mr. Murdoch of Keith being present,
and agreeing with these resolutions. This Synod was held
at Forres on April 23rd, 1845. This was the last occasion
when Bishop Low was himself present at the meeting of his
Diocesan Synod. More freedom should have been given to
clergy and congregations in regard to the use of the two
Communion Offices. It was as unjust to forbid the use of
the Scottish Office by congregations who had long been ac
customed to that Liturgy, as it was impolitic for the advo
cates of the Scottish use to seek, by Canonical enactments,
to force it upon unwilling congregations, or to continue it
where it was not wanted. Had the two rites been placed
upon a footing of equality, many unpleasant occurrences
such as those just narrated would have been prevented.
Nothing beyond ordinary routine business occupied the
attention of the Synod in 1846. In the Synod of 1848
the Rev. Hugh Willoughby Jermyn of Forres, now Primus of
the Scottish Church, acted as Synod Clerk. At that time,
the Rev. William Palmer, a Deacon ofthe Church of England,
was endeavouring to bring about a state of intercommunion
between the Anglican Church and the Orthodox Church of
the East. Mr. Palmer was introduced to the Synod of
Moray which met at Elgin in 1849, ^"'l l^'s arguments were
there favourably considered. It was at this Synod that
the Rev. J. Murdoch sent in his last report of the state of
the Congregation at Keith. The number of sittings was then
stated by him to be no, the number of souls 80, the number
baptised 4, the number of catechumens 20, and the number of
deaths 2. The communicants at Easter and Whitsunday
were 30 and 15 respectively, the total number of com
municants in the congregation being 54.
Mr. Murdoch's influence as a teacher extended beyond his
own Communion, one of his pupils, the Rev. Dr. Sellar of
Aberlour, becoming Moderator of the General Assembly of
the Established Church of Scotland. Dr. SeUar never forgot
Mr. Murdoch's kindness to him, and when in 1880 a sub
scription list was opened to erect in the Episcopal Church at
Keith a memorial to his memory. Dr. Sellar in intimating his
subscription, said of the departed Presbyter, " I have much
pleasure in joining in a tribute of respect to the memory of
my much esteemed Teacher and Friend." At one time Mr,
Murdoch's house was a seminary for those who were training
for Holy Orders. The Venerable Archdeacon Mackenzie

TJie Church at Keith in the Niruteenth Century. 121
¦" the famous Pastor Duncan," the zealous Pastor of Dingwall
and Strathnairn, studied at Keith ; there also the late Bishop
Wilson of Glasgow was educated before he went to College.
This much lamented Prelate always venerated the memory
of " good John Murdoch," and gave a handsome subscription
to the memorial Altar erected to his memory in Trinity Church.
The sons of landed proprietors from distant quarters
were sent to Mr. Murdoch to be taught by him, one of these
being Mr. Mackenzie of Ord in Ross-shire. Another pupil of
Mr. Murdoch's was James Gordon Bennett, who afterwards
established the famous American newspaper, the New York
Herald. Mr. Gordon Bennett had acquired considerable
proficiency in Latin and Greek, under Mr. ^Iurdoch's teaching,
and he was for a time both Editor and Publisher of his own
newspaper. Another pupil was William Longmore, the
founder of the firm of William Longmore & Co., who in
1872 erected the public hall at Keith, now called Longmore
Hall and presented it to Keith and Parish. Yet another
was George Kynoch, in his day a zealous and generous
supporter of the Episcopal Church at Keith. Mr. Kynoch,
who died in August, 1883, was the founder of the firm of
Messrs. G. and G. Kynoch.
Mr. Murdoch married, in the early part of the centur)-,
Miss Mary Keir, who was to him a worthy helpmate.
He had a large family and three of his daughters were
married to clergymen of the Church.
On April, 23rd, 1850, the Rev. H. B. Moffat was
instituted by Bishop Ewing acting for Bishop Low, as
Mr. Murdoch's assistant and successor. But the aged
Presbyter was soon to be called to his eternal rest. He de
parted this life on April 29th, 1850, at the age of 83. Thus
ended a long and useful ministry, a great part of which was
spent underthe Episcopal superintendence of the saintlyBishop
Jolly, and which was associated at its commencement with
the memories of Bishop Macfarlane and Bishop Abernethy
Drummond. The body of the departed Presbyter they laid
in its last resting place within the site of the old Church in
the Keith Churchyard, in a spot connected with many me
morable scenes in the history of his Communion. There
once the persuasive voice of the saintly Patrick Forbes of
Corse had sounded in prayer and exhortation ; near that
spot the great Marquis of Montrose had patiently endured
"the railing of one ofthe ex-chaplains of David Leslie's army ;
there Sir James Strachan had prayed for King James II.
in defiance of Dutch William's proclamation ; there members

122 The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century.
of the Episcopal Church had been fined and imprisoned for
conscience sake ; and there had been heard for the last time,.
the shout of victory from the soldiers of Prince Charies
Edward just before the fatal day of Culloden Moor.
On April ISth, 1885, the stone Altar, above referred to,
as having been erected in Keith Church to Mr. Mur
doch's memory, was consecrated by Bishop Haldane of
Argyll. All Mr. Murdoch's surviving pupils subscribed
to this memorial, a poor widow belonging to another
Communion, of her own accord contributing her mite as a
token of her vivid remembrance of Mr. Murdoch's kindness
to her when she was a pupU in his school. The following is
the dedicatory inscription : —
"Ad Gloriam Dei."
" This Altar was erected in loving memory of the Rev. John
Murdoch, who was Incumbent of this Charge from 1800 to 1850."^
" He shall feed His flock like a Shepherd. Is. xl. II."
In the year 1847, Bishop Low, out ofhis own means, pro
vided an Endowment for the Diocese of Argyll, which had
been conjoined with Moray and Ross, but which was now
erected into a separate bishopric. In 1851, Bishop Low hav
ing resigned the See of Moray and Ross, the Rev. Robert
Eden, Rector of Leigh in Essex, was duly elected, and
afterwards consecrated its Diocesan. Bishop Eden be
came Primus of the Church in 1862, and during his
primacy, the Church made great advances both in Mission
work at home, and in Foreign Missions abroad. Munificent
as Bishop Eden always was to the Cathedral at Inverness —
built mainly through his exertions — and to the Diocese, the
work to be done was far beyond the compass of a single life
time. Like the splendid work of the late Bishop Forbes at
Dundee, and of the venerable and learned member of our
existing Episcopate who has identified himself with the cause
of Home Re-union, the result will be seen in, days to come.
" Their labours wUl not bein vain in the Lord."
The Rev. Hugh Bethune Moffat, M.A.
Mr. Moffat, who succeeded Mr. Murdoch as the Incumbent
of Keith, was born at Liverpool. He was ordained Deacon
by Bishop Low in 1846, in St. John's Church, Pittenween,
and Priest by the same Bishop in 1849. For 24 years Mr,
Moffat ministered to the Keith congregation, and resigned
in 1874. The following is Mr. Moffat's statistical return of
the state of the Keith congregation in 1872 : — Number of

The Church at Keith in the Nineteenth Century. 123
souls, 74; number of communicants, 35 ; number of baptisms,
3 ; number of persons catechised, 9 ; average number of
ciimmunicants, 19. Mr. Moffat wrote many sermons for the
London "Pulpit," and several in the "Church of England
Magazine," besides many newspaper articles and letters. It
should be added that Mr. Moffat was at one time Dean of
Moray and Ross,
The Rev. Henry D'Arcy Simpson.
Mr. Simpson became Incumbent in 1874, and resigned at
the end of 1875. ^^ started a Parsonage Fund.
The Rev. J. Archibald, the present Incumbent.
Mr. Archibald received the degree of M.A at Aberdeen
University in 1869, and in 1870 he gained the Jamieson
Scholarship and Bell Prize Essay at Glenalmond. Ordained
as Deacon by the Bishop of Aberdeen in 1870, and Priest by
the Bishop of Manchester in 1871. Mr. Archibald was
Curate of St. John's Church, Over Darwen, Lancashire, from
1871 to 1873, when he became Incumbent of St. John's
Church, Wick. In 1876 Mr. Archibald came to his present
Charge at Keith, and at once brought forward the Parsonage
Fund which had reached about £i\o during the incumbency
of his predecessor.
In a little more than a year the congregation were
able to buy the present Parsonage at the cost of £'!OJ.
Near the close of 187S a Church Fund was started, and
on June 22nd, 1882, the corner stone of the new fabric was
laid by Miss Gordon Duff of Drummuir, acting for her sister-
in-law, Mrs. T. Gordon Duff of Park, who was absent,
owing to ill-health, in South Africa. The new church was
consecrated on June 28th, 1883, by the Right Rev. the Bishop
of Brechin, now Primus, acting for Bishop Eden. Altogether,
including the gift of the new organ, it has cost over ;^26oo.
When Mr. Archibald became Incumbent at Keith the
number of souls was 84. The following is the return of the
state of the congregation made by the present Incumbent
for the year ending June 30th, 1888 : — Number of souls,
207; numberof baptisms, 8 ; number of burials, 7 ; number
catechised, 98; number confirmed, 11 ; number of com
municants, 100.

IReminiscencce
OF THE
DIOCESES OF MORAY AND ROSS.

Consecration of Bishop Jolly.
In the year 1796 Bishop Macfarlane requested the appoint
ment of a Coadjutor for the Diocese of Moray, Ross, and
Argyll, and the Rev. Alexander Jolly, Presbyter at Fraser
burgh, was chosen as a fit and proper candidate for the
office. Bishop Abernethy Drummond artd Bishop Watson of
Dunkeld approved of the proposal, but Primus John Skinner
opposed it to the very last. In a letter from Aberdeen,
dated March ist, 1796. Primus Skinner-expressed his opinion
to Bishop Abernethy Drummond, in these words —
" With regard to Bishop Macfarlane's proposal of having Mr.
Jolly consecrated to be his Coadjutor, I requested of Bishop
Watson to intimate to you and Bishop Strachan, my reasons for not
agreeing to it, which, I hoped, would have induced you not to
persist in urging a measure, which in the present situation of things
can answer no good purpose, and may be attended with very dis
agreeable censequences. No man can be more sensible of Mr.
Jolly's merits as a clergyman than I am, as I hope I am equally
disposed with my brethren to show all due regard to piety and
learning, where they appear in a conspicuous manner. But I am
not fond of drawing comparisons, to the prejudice of the clergy in
general. And though Mr. Jolly were ever so fit, both inwardly
and outwardly for the office of a Bishop, I do not see what use he
can be of in the manner proposed, and at such a distance from the
place where his assistance is chiefly wanted. He has never been
accustomed to travelling beyond the limits of his pastoral charge,
and to my certain knowledge is as poor as Bishop Macfarlarie, and
as little able to bear the expense, which among us is necessarily
attached to the Episcopal character. I know-too, that in two very

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 1 2 5
material points he diff'ers in opinion from all the present Bishops,
and on one of these points, signified his scruples by a letter to you,
disapproving of part of out conduct when at London in the year
1789. I am far from wishing to have these points agitated now,
and therefore hope my colleagues will not lay me under the dis
agreeable necessity of discovering all my reasons for opposing the
pre-ient measure, which, I must do, if they shall be so indelicate and
unfriendly as compel me to it. 'Tis enough that there appears no
necessity for the measure, no good end likely to be answered by it,
and that I have too much cause to apprehend very bad consequences
from it to the peace, unity, and good order of this Diocese, of the
.situation of which I must be allowed to be the best judge, as I am
accountable to my Judge in heaven for acquiescing in any measure
that may be productive of injury to it. With the offer of my best
•wishes for your health and happiness, and requesting a share in
your prayers."
One of Primus Skinner's objections to Bishop Jolly was,
no doubt, the fact that he was opposed to the Hutchinsonian
doctrine believed in by the Primus himself and some of his
colleagues. This very objection was indeed something in
favour of Mr, Jolly, and as the event proved, the elevation of
that saintly man to the episcopate, was in itself a means of
counteracting that heresy. On page 54 of Bishop Jolly's
life, by the Rev. Dr. Walker of Monymusk, it is said of
Bishop Jolly's consecration — " No reference appears to have
been made to the Presbyters of the Diocese, over which the
proposed Coadjutor was to have rule." It appears, however,
from the following letter of Bishop Macfarlane to Bishop
.Skinner, quoted in a letter of the latter to Bishop Abernethy
Drummond, that the consent of the Presbyters had been
•obtained to Mr. Jolly's appointment. This letter is dated
May nth, 1796, and the following is Bishop Macfarlane's
.letter quoted by the Primus : —
" I am informed by Bishop Abernethy Drummond, that
Bishop Watson wrote to him, that you object to the consecra
tion of Mr. Jolly, as Coadjutor of Ross and Moray, because
the consent of the Presbyters is not obtained. This indirect
method of objecting may indicate candour and wisdom though not
apparent. I am apt to suspect the objection is not given in your
own words. I imagine the objection would be, that Mr. Jolly was not
previously Coadjutor and successor, as was Mr. John Skinner elected
¦of Aberdeen. In case the objection be as given to me, I assure you
that the full qnqualified consent and solicitation of the Presbyters is
obtained and made. In case it be as I suspect, — know, that I have
no design, that the single, unprecedented, uncanonical, preposter
ous case, mentioned above, shall be either imitated or sanctipned
by anything I shall be concerned in. For ought that appears to such
.as are not iri the secret, Mr. John Skinner of Aberdeen is not re-

126 Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
gular canonical B'lshop o{ Ahetdeen to this day. As no answer has
been made to the request to you as Primus, to call a meeting, and
as £^ moderate time is long since elapsed ; as no sufficient canonical
objections have been given in, it now remains for the Bishops at
their convenience to do their duty, without regard to sullen silence
or indirect trivial objections. Even yet, however, a speedy intima
tion of wiUingness to act with your colleagues,' may be attended to.
Had it not been hinted to me that an intimation as above might be
proper, I should not have given it, as esteeming it needless."
This letter from Bishop Macfarlane was without a date,
and Primus Skinner said that in it he was neither treated
as a bishop, as a gentleman, nor with'common civility. The
truth was that the rest of the bishops were exasperated by the
continued and determined opposition made by the Primus
to Bishop Jolly's consecration, and they had made up their
minds to go on without him. After commenting severely on
Bishop Macfarlane's letter, the Primus wrote as follows : —
" In the year 1789, the bishops of this Church declared them
selves in a formal manner, to be in communion with the Church of
England, and have ever since acted on this principle, in the various
overtures, which have been made for effecting an union between us
and the English clergy in this country. Yet a majority ef the same
bishops are now proposing to adopt into their number, a man who ,
condemns the principle on which they have been acting, as giving a
sanction to heresy and schism and viewing it in that light, will, no
doubt, make use of the power, with which he hopes to be invested,.
to prevent the operation of what he thinks an erroneous principle,
and put a stop to all further communications between us and the
schismatical, heretical, public Church of England ! "
Primus Skinner considered Mr. Jolly as an opponent of
the proposed union, and in the words just quoted he insinuates
that he thought it to be schismatical and heretical. Some
members of the Church in Scotland at that time held the
opinion that the English non-juring body was the real
Church of England, and possibly Mr. Jolly may have ex
pressed sympathy with such views. Even far on into the
nineteenth century some of the Scottish clergy cherished
friendly remembrances of that now extinguished body. A
manuscript has been presented to the writer in Mr. Murdoch's-
handwriting, full of quotations from the writings of the Eng
lish non-jurors.
In the same letter of May, 1796, Primus Skinner said that
he would not give Mr. Jolly leave to go out of the Aberdeen
Diocese to be consecrated.
" If it be the distinguishing feature of Episcopal Government, as,
we all profess to acknowledge that every Bishop is the head and

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 127
principle of unity in his own district," it lollows of consequence,
that no Presbyter is at liberty to leave it or while he locally abides
in it, to relinquish his subordinate station, without consent of him
under whose authority he acts ; which authority it is my duty to
maintain, and with God's help I will maintain it, while I retain my
present relation to the Diocese of Aberdeen. You may therefore
meet with the other Bishops when and where you plea.se, for any
purpose which is sanctioned by the Canons and practice of the
Christian Church, when situated as it now is in this country ; but
I know no right that you or they, have, by any Canon or regular
precedent, to command or expect the attendance of any Presbyter
in my Diocese, if I shall think proper to forbid it, tiU I have been
judicially tried and found guilty of some crime, for which I ought
to be deprived of my Episcopal power and dignity. So I beg you
will attend to all this in making your appointments, lest you kindle
a flame in the Church, which you may not live to see extinguished,
and by your attempts to crush one offending brother, bring the
whole fabric in ruins about your ears. May God prevent such piti
able desolation and disappoint those violent measures that would
lead to it." (Aberdeen, March nth, 1796.)
In these words. Primus John Skinner told Bishop
Abernethy Drummond that he should, if he thought
proper, order Mr. JoUy not to leave the Diocese of Aber
deen to be consecrated Coadjutor Bishop of Moray and
Ross, well knowing that the new Bishop would be inde
pendent of his Episcopal rule, as his charge would then be
regarded as being in his own Diocese. So long as Mr.
Jolly provided for the proper performance of his minis
terial duty at Fraserburgh, it was certainly a stretch of
Episcopal authority to forbid him to leave the Diocese for so
short a period as would be required for his Consecration.
The other Bishops appointed June 24th, St. John Baptist's
Day, as the date of Mr. JoUy's Consecration, which they de
cided should take place at Dundee, the Episcopal Synod being'
summoned to meet at the same place on the day previous. In
a letter addressed to Bishop Abernethy Drummond, Primus
Skinner refused to call either of these meetings, alleging that
the Requisition had not been signed by a majority of the
Bishops, but he appointed the 25th of August for a meeting
of the Episcopal Synod of Aberdeen, "to consider the
propriety of publishing a Catechism for the instruction of
young Christians, and whatever else maybe proposed for the
good of our Church, and for the benefit of its clergy and
laity.'' The date of this letter was June iSth, 1796.
On the 23rd of June, ^ishop Abernethy Drummond, Bishop
Macfarlane, and Bishop Strachan, met at Dundee and delayed

128 Retniniscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
the meeting of Synod till next day, to give Bishop Watson
of Dunkeld an opportunity of attendance with the Church
Registers and Minutes of Synod. On the morning of the
24th inst., neither Primus Skinner nor Bishop Watson had
arrived, and the above-named three Bishops determined
to proceed to business without them. They appointed Bishop
Abernethy Drummond as Yr\m\yi, pro teinpore, ¦a.xvd. elected
Mr. JoUy,' clerk of the meeting.
The Synod having been duly constituted, the protest of
Primus Skinner was read in the foUowing terms :^
" I, John Skinner, Bishop of Aberdeen, and Primus of the
Scotch Episcopal CoUege, being informed that my Right
Reverend colleagues are to meet at Dundee on the 23rd day
of this month of June, for the purpose of acting in a Synodi-
cal manner, and particularly for discussing and judging of an
appeal which the Rev. M. Alexander JoOy, Presbyter in
Fraserburgh has made to the Bishops of the Scotch Episco
pal Church convened in Synod, do hereby protest against
the said meeting, and any adjournment of it, as uncanonical
and irregular, because by the 2nd of the Canons of this
Church, made in 1743; it is only, 'if and when the Primus
shall refuse to caU a meeting, when desifed by a majority of
the other Bishops, that they shall have power to meet and
act synodically without him.' But I as Primus have not
been desired by a majority of the other Bishops to call the
foresaid meeting, and therefore it is not to be held as a regu
lar Synod of Bishops, nor any of its proceedings or decrees
to be considered as binding on the Bishops and clergy of
this. Church. And —
" Whereas I am likewise informed that my Right Reverend
colleagues are to meet at Dundee on the 24th day of this
month, for the purpose of consecrating the Rev. Mr. Alex
ander JoUy, at Fraserburgh, one of the Presbyters of the
Diocese of Aberdeen, to be Coadjutor to the Bishop of Ross
and Moray, without my consent and concurrence as Bishop
of the said Diocese, I do hereby dissent from and protest
against such consecration upon the grounds and for the
reasons following : —
" I. Because it does not appear to me that the said Bisbop
of Ross and Morky can stand in need of a Coadjutor or
assistant in the offices of a Bishop, which but rarely occur,
while he is able to discharge the frequent duties of a Pastor
to several congregations considerably distant from each
other ; whith yet, I am well assured, is the case, and shows

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 129
that the proposed appointment of a Coadjutor is wholly un
necessary and for that reason ought not be agreed to.
"II. Because on the supposition that the said Bishop of
Ross and Moray were really reduced by old age or infirmity,
to the necessity of having some assistance in tbe more distant
congregations, and particularly, as he alleges, in the Highland
parts of his Episcopal charge, yet the person proposed for
this purpose, is most improper and unfit, on account of the
very great distance of his place of residence from the High
land parts ofthe districts of Ross and Moray, and the almost
impossibility of his being able to do any good in so remote a
quarter ; which shows the present proposal to be very absurd
and ill concerted, and for that reason unworthy of being
encouraged. "III. Because it being already shown that the proposed
consecration is neither necessary nor expedient, it is highly
improper that it should take place, on account of its being
the means of dismembering the Diocese of Aberdeen, and
introducing that sort of mixed government which having
been found productive of various inconveniences, ought to be
avoided as much as possible : and of the danger to which
this Diocese is thereby exposed, I ought to be sustained as
the fittest judge, both from my necessary connection and
intimate acquaintance with all its clergy, and from my
knowledge of some particular circumstances, which have
determined me to refuse my consent to a measure so likely
to be attended with many disagreeable consequences.
" IV. Because the said Mr. Alexander Jolly is believed to
differ in opinion from the Bishops of this Church, as to the
proper method of testifying the sincerity of their compliance
with the present Government, and with respect to the pro
priety of declaring themselves to be in Communion with the
Established Church of England : which difference in opinion
renders his promotion to the Episcopal dignity a very
hazardous ancl imprudent measure, and' which ought not to
be attempted till proper steps have been previously taken for
guarding against the occasion which might otherwise be
afforded of imputing insincerity and inconsistency of conduct
to the Scotch Bishops.
" For all these reasons which I have detailed at length in
a private correspondence with my Right Reverend colleagues,
I find myself called upon out of regard to the good of our
national Church in general, as well as for the peace of my
own Diocese in particular, and the support of that just

130 Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
authority which I ought to maintain in it, to dissent from
and protest against, as I hereby formally do, the execution
of this improper, irregular, and violent scheme of dismember
ing the Diocese of Aberdeen, and infringing the rights and
privileges of its Diocesan, reserving to myself the power of
taking such steps as I shall find necessary for the due regula
tion of that portion of our Church which was canonically and
unanimously by all concerned committed to my charge.
"And I require that this my protest and reservation be
received and inserted, if need be, in the Minute Book of our
Episcopal College, there to remain, infuturam rei memoriam.
"John Skinner.
"Bishop of Aberdeen and Primus.
"Aberdeen, June 20, 1796."
In this protest. Primus John Skinner says nothing about
another important difference between his own opinions and
those of Mr. Jolly — the Hutchinsonianism of the former —
this difference as we have seen being a recommendation
in favour of Mr. Jolly's promotion to the Episcopate.
The Bishops then gave their decision regarding the protest,
and expressed it in the minutes of the Synod as follows : —
" As it is a fact which Bishop Skinner cannot deny that he was
required by the Right Reverend Bishops Macfarlane, Abernethy
Drummond, and Strachan, to call a meeting in this place on the 24th
of June, for the express purpose of consecrating the Reverend Mr.
Alexander Jolly, Presbyter in Fraserburgh, which request he did not
comply with, they as a niajority of the Bishops of this Church had a
right to meet on said day and act synodically without him. And
being of opinion that the two first reasons in support of his protest
are frivolous, and the danger mentioned in his third reason is with
out foundation, and having clear and undoubted evidence that the
fourth is a mere mistake under the hand of said Mr. Jolly, whose
certification shall be recorded in the Register of the Church — they
therefore find themselves at liberty to hold a Synod and proceed to
the consecration without regard to the said protest."
A long letter from Primus Skinner accompanied the protest,
and was duly read before the Synod. The Primus had also
carried out his threat, and expressly forbidden Mr. Jolly
to leave the Diocese of Aberdeen with a view to consecra
tion. The Bishops assembled in Synod at Dundee, next took
into consideration this arbitrary command of the Primus,
and the following are the words of the minutes of the Synod
which effectuaUy disposed of the said prohibition : —
" The Synod also took into consideration an appeal of the said Mr.

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 131
Jolly from the Prohibition of the Right Reverend Bishop Skinner
his Ordinary, who knowing that a day and place had been appointed
for his consecration, did expressly discharge him to attend said
meeting in these terms: — 'And I do hereby forbid and prohibit
your attending any meeting which shall be called or held for the
purpose of altering the form or boundary of the Diocese without my
consent, or appointing you to any ofiice or station that may be
subversive of or inconsistent with the duty and obedience which you
owe to me your regular Diocesan.'
"The Synod having considered the words of this Prohibition are
clearly of opinion that such a power is not competent to any Bishop
and that the claiming of such a power, subjects the claimant to the
penalty denounced in the 3rd Canon of 1743, and when the Bishops
call to mind the ample testimony which the Right Reverend Bishop
Skinner has given to the merits of the candidate, both in a letter
to himself and to some of the Bishops, they are utterly at a loss how
to account for his attempt to prevent the intended consecration. In
consideration thereof the said Right Rev. Dr. Abernethy Drummond,
Primus, Bishop Macfarlane and Bishop Strachan hereby annul and
make void the said Prohibition and declare that the said Mr. Jolly
is pitched upon by the said Bishop Macfarlane to be his Coadjutor
with the full consent aad approbation of all the Presbyters of the
Diocese of Ross and Moray signified to him in a letter of the 27th
of May last and laid before the Synod, he has a right to be con
secrated and that they are determined to proceed to his consecration
accordingly. " Wm. Abernethy Drummond, Primus,
" Alexander Jolly, Clerk."
After delivering this judgment the Episcopal Synod
adjourned, and the consecration of Mr. Jolly was proceeded
with, the three Bishops who had been present at the Synod
taking part in the solemn service.
The Episcopal Synod met again in the kfternoon and gave
this deUverance concerning a letter which the Primus pro
tempore, had received from Bishop Watson of Dunkeld : —
"The Consecration being over, and the Synod which had been
adjourned before noon being resumed, a letter from the Right
Reverend Bishop Watson was received by Bishop Abernethy Drum
mond, apologising for his absence on account of a severe indis
position, and for his not sending the Minute Book, because he expected
to have it conveyed by his friend, Mr. Jolly, which apology the
Synod accepted."* ^
* The next business that engaged the attention of this Episcopal Synod was
the new fund for the indigent clergy and their widows, which was brought to.the
notice bf the Bishops by a memorial from the Rev. John Cruiclcshank, Treasurer
of the Scotch ^Episcopal Friendly Society. In respect of this, the Synod gave
the following deliverance— " As the old fund is now happily evicted out of the
hands of the former managers, and of consequence falls under the administration

1 3 2 Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
The Bishops at this Synod as an answer, to the fourth
objection of Primus John Skinner to Mr. Jolly's consecra
tion, caused the latter to sign the following declaration :—
Dundee, June 23rd, 1796.—" I do hereby solemnly declare and
certify that I acquiesce ex animo, agree and fully consent to what
the Bishops of this Church have done to express their dutiful sub
mission to the present Civil Government of these kingdoms, and
that I' will unite in Church Communion with the clergy of the
Enghsh Mission in Scotland upon Christian Catholic Principles,
and as the Bishops ofthe Church shall agree."
Thus ended the matter which had given so much trouble
and anxiety to the Primus and to the Bishtjps who dif
fered from him in regard fo Bishop Jolly's consecration.
There can be little doubt that this consecration brought mani
fold blessings toour Communion in Scotland. There must
still be many of the saintly Bishop's letters in the possession
of private parties, which, should they come to light, will reveal
still more of his truly exalted spiritual character and holy
lile. In this world he was ever in communion with his Lord
as he is now for ever with Him in the heavenly city —
" For ever with the Lord,
Amen ! So let it be.
Life from the dead is in that word
'Tis immortality."
The Bishops present at this Synod, signed a declaration, to
the effect that Mr. Jolly had been duly consecrated. This
document and another, the Deed of Election of the Bishop
to the Diocese of Moray, together with his Letters of Orders,
have been placed in the custody of the Synod Clerk of
the Diocese of Moray and Ross, for preservation among the
Diocesati archives, by the Rev. Dr. Gordon, Incumbent of
St. Andrew's Church, Glasgow. The following are the
words of the declaration referred to : —
"These do certify to all concerned, that the Reverend Mr. Alex-
aniler Jolly, Presbyter at Fraserburgh, was this day consecrated
Bishop to be Coadjutor to the Ri^jht Reverend Mr. Andrew Mac
farlane, Bishop of Ross and Moray, in the Chapel of the Right

of the Bishops, in virtue of their election to that ofifice by the clergy convened at
Laurencekirk, Anno 17S9, the Synod is of opinion that the interest of the said
fund ought to be alimentally bestowed upon the indigent clergy and widows^
who before our compliance with Government were then entitled to asliare of it. ¦"
'' After which resolution the Synod was dissolved.
" Wm. Abernethy Drummond, Primus.
" Alexander Jolly, Clerk."

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 133
Reverend Bishop Strachan in Dundee, by us the subscribing Bishops.
Given at Dundee this twenty-fourth d.iy of June, in the year of our
Lord, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-sixth.
" Wm. Abernethy Drummond, Primus.
" Andrew Macfarlane, Bishop of Ross and Moray.
"John. Strachan, Bishop of Brechin."
Election of Bishop Jolly as Bishop of Moray.
The Presbyters ofthe Diocese of Moray met at Keith on
February 14th, 1798, in obedience to a Mandate from the
Primus and the other Bishops, authorising them to meet and
elect a Bishop of the Diocese of Moray, Bishop Macfarlane
having resigned that ,part of the Diocese previously united
under his Episcopal care. The assembled Presbyters, only
four in number, proceeded to elect a Bishop in terms of the
Mandate, and Bishop Jolly was unanimously elected to the
vacant See, The Deed of Election runs as follows : —
" In the name of God. Amen.
" Blessed be the Holy and Undivided Trinity. Amen.
" We, the underwritten Presbyters of the Diocese of Moray,
having taken into our consideration the present stale of the district
now vacant by the resignation of our late Ordinary, Bishop Macfar
lane, and having before us a Mandate from the Primus and the other
Bishops of the Church, authorising us to meet and elect a Bishop to
take charge of said Diocese, and to dispense to us the offices peculiar
to the Episcopate, have unanimously made choice of the Right Rev.
Mr. Alexander Jolly, at Fraserburgh, and we hereby'nominate and
elect him to be our Bishop, promising him all due and canonical
obedience upon this our Deed of Election being ratified and con
firmed by the Primus and other Bishops. In testimony whereof,.
we have subscribed these presents at Keith, this fourteenth day of
February, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-eight.
" Hugh Buchan.
" Alex. Christie.
"James Walker.
" Alex. Shand for Fochabers."
There had been a piroposal that Bishop JoUy should reside
within the ancient Diocese of Moray, and that the boundaries
of that Diocese should be altered, ."^ome diversity of opinion
arose upon these points, between the Bishops and the Presby
ters of the Diocese, the latter being decidedly opposed to any
change in the limits of the Moray Diocese. Primus John
Skinner did not think the boundaries of the Diocese should
be changed, but thought it would be more for the good of
the Church, if the Bishop left Frasferburgh, and accepted a

134 Retniniscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
Pastoral Charge in Moray. Bishop Macfarlane, on the other
hand, thought there was occasion to alter the ancient limits
of the Diocese, but that there was no need that Bishop JoUy
should leave Fraserburgh. The Presbyters assembled at
Keith on February 14th, 1798, to elect a Bishop of Moray,
and at the same time drew up the following Memorial in
favour of retaining the ancient bounds of the See : —
" The Memorial of the Presbyters of the Diocese of Moray to the
Right Reverend the Primus and the other Bishops of this Church.
We, the Presbyters of the Diocese of Moray, met at Keith on the
.14th February, having taken into our consideration the scheme in
agitation of disjoining the said DioCese, and annexing in future that
part of it presently under the pastoral charge of the Right Reverend
Bishop Macfarlane, to the Bishopric of Ross, beg humbly to repre
sent our opinions to the Bishops with regard to the above measure,
in hopes that they will not alter the antient boundary of our Diocese
without urgent necessity. At present wc can see no reason for
making the proposed annexation to the Diocese of Ross, as the 9th
Canon sufficiently secures to'Bishop Macfarlane, during his residence
within this Diocese, the congregation of which he has the charge.
We therefore humbly beg of your Reverences, that you will be kind
enough to pay attention to this our request that the antient limits of
the Diocese may be allowed to remain as they have been aforetime,
which we conceive may be done without any material disadvantage
or inconveniency to the Church in general, and which will be
gratifying to the Presbyters of Moray in particular.
" Hugh Buchan.
" Alex, Christie.
"J. Walker.
" Alex. Shand, Fochabers.
" Keith, February 14th, 1798."
The proposal seems to have been that Inverness should
be added to the Diocese of Ross in order to secure the rights
of Bishop Macfarlane. These however were' already secured
by the 9th Canon, so that it was unnecessary to make a per
manent separation of Inverness from the Diocese of Moray.
The following remarks were appended to the memorial by
Primus John Skinner and Bishop Macfarlane respectively :—
Aberdeen, February 22nd, 1798.— "With regard to the Memorial
¦from the Presbyters of Moray on the following page, I hereby give
it as my opinion that what they suggest is reasonable, as there
appears to be no occasion at present for altering the ancient limits
•of the Diocese. I likewise think that Bishop Jolly's having a
pastoral Charge in the Diocese of Moray and residing personally
in it, would be more for the good of the Church and of that Diocese
in particular, than his present situation.
"John Skinner, Bishop of Aberdeen.''

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 135
Inverness, 27th February, 1798. — " Wi;h regard to the Memorial
from the Presbyters of Moray on Ihe foregoing page, I hereby give
it as my opinion that what they suggest is without any good reason,.
as there appears to be no occasion at present for altering the ancient
limits of the Diocese. I likewise think that Bishop Jolly's having
a pastoral charge in the Diocese of Moray, and residing personally
in it, would be no more for the good of the Church and that Diocese
in particular than his present situation ; as he might within that
Diocese be further distant from his Electors, as was their late
Bishop, than where he is. " Andrew Macfarlane, Bishop of Ross."
Thus ends the story of Bishop Jolly's consecration ancl of
his subsequent election and collation to the Diocese of
Moray. Primus John Skinner and Bishop JoUy soon forgot
the differences that had existed regarding the consecration
of the latter, and they continued stedfast friends to the
very last. When Primus Skinner died and his body was
laid in its last resting' place in St. Peter's Churchyard, Aber
deen, there was no mourner more sincere than the Bishop of
Moray, and no one knew better the loss that the Church
had sustained by the death of so able an administrator.
- Very touching are those words of the Bishop of Moray
already quoted in these articles — addressed as we know to
the Rev. W. Skinner of Forfar, the son of the Primus : —
" The longer I live, the more I lament the loss we have suffered
by his translation to a better world. The lovely likeness of him
which, from one of my copies of your Annals, hangs in my Closet,
excites the warm emotions of my heart, while I reverently kiss it
in affectionate veneration for his memory I May we tread in his
steps, and through the mercy of our Lord, follow him to Paradise,
where all is peace and all, is joy."

We append Bishop Jolly's Letters of Orders, and the
Deed of his Collation to the See of Moray.
Letters of Deacon's Orders.
Aberdeen, 2nd July, 1776. — "These are to certify all whom it
may concern that yesterday being the' first instant, Mr. Alexander
Jolly was duly and canonically ordained a Deacon of the' Church,.
and is duly authorised to execute said ofiice by me.
"•Robert Kilgour, Bishop of Aberdeen."

Letters of Priest's Orders.
" In Dei Nomine. Amen.
"Omnibus Catholicis tenore praesentium pateat, quod anno
Domini millesimo septingentesimo septiiagesimo septimo, die vero-

136 Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
Martii decimo nono, Nos Robertus Kilgour miseratione divina
Episcopus Aberdonensis (Christi praesidio freti) sacros Ordines in
Oratorio apud Peterhead celebrantes, Dilectum nobis in Christo,
Fratrem Alexandrum Jolly, Diaconum, ac nobis de vitae integrjtate,
morum probitate, Eruditione Orthodoxiaque bene coinmendatum,
in sacrum Presbyteratus gradum promovimus, et secundum morem
et ritus Ecclesiae Scoticanae Presbyterum ordinavimus. Jn cujus
rei testimonium, instrumento huic (Chirographo nostro prius munito)
sigillum nostrum apponi curavimus. — Datum apud Peterhead A.C.,
1787, et consecrationis nostrae decimo nqno, die Februarii vigesimo
septimo. " Robertus Kilgour, Ep. Primus.''
Translation.
" In the Name of God. Amen.
" Let it be manifest by the tenor uf these presents to all
members of the Univeral Church tliat in the year of the Lord
1777, on the 19th day of March, We, Robert Kilgour, by
the divine mercy Bishop of Aberdeen (relying on the protection
of Christ) and dispensing sacred ordinances in the Chapel at
Peterhead, have promoted to the sacred order of the priesthood,
and have ordained Presbyter according, to the manner and rites of
the Scottish Church, our beloved brother in Christ, Alexander
Jolly, Deacon, well commended to us for integrity of life, goodness
of mor.tli, learning and orthodoxy. In testimohy of which we have
taken care that our seal be affixed to this instrument (strengthened
first by our autograph signature). Given at Peterhead on the 27th
day of February, in the year of Christ 1787, and in the nineteenth
year of our Consecration." " Robert Kilgour, Bishop and Primus."
Thus Bishop Jolly was ordained Presbyter on March 19th,
1777, but for some unexplained reason did not receive this
document till February 27th, 17S7.

Letters of Bishop's Orders.
" In Dei Nomine. Amen.
" Omnibus ubique Catholicis per praesentes pateat, Nos Guliel-
mum Abernethy Drummond miseratione divini Episcopum Glas-
guensem, et pro tempore Primum Andreas Macfarlane Episcopum
Rossen et Moravien, et Jdannem Strachan, Episcopum Brechinen,
mysteria sacra Domini nostri Jesu Christi in Oratorio apud Tuodunum
celebrantes, Divini Numinis praesidio fretos (presentibus tum e
Clero quum e Populo testibus idoneis) Alexandrum Jolly, A.M., et
sacro Presbyteratus ordine jam condecoratum, ac nobis pro vitEe
integntate, morum probitate, et orthodoxia commmendatum et ad
.d9cendum et regendum aptum et idoneum, ad sacrum et sublimem
Episcopatus ordinem promovisse et rite ac canonice secundum morem

Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 137
et ritus Ecclesiae Scoticanae consecrasse. Die vigesimo quarto Junii,
Anno serae Christianse millesimo septingentesimo nonagesimo sexto.
In cujus rei testimonium, instrumento huic (Chirographis nostris
prius munito) Sigilla nostra apponi mandaminus.
" Gul. Abernethy Drummond, Ep. et Primus.
" Andreas Macfarlane, Ep. Rossen. et Moravien.
"Joannis Strachan, Ep. Brechinen."
Translation.
" In the name of God. Amen.
"Let it be evident to all members ofthe Universal Church in all
places by these presents, that We, William Abernethy Drummond, by
the divine mercy Bishop of Glasgow and pro tern-pore Primus,
Andrew Maclarlane, Bishop of Ross and Moray, and John Strachan,
Bishop of Brechin, celebrating the sacred mysteries of our Lord
Jesus Christ in the Chapel at Dundee, and relying on the protection
of the Divine Godhead (both clergy and people being present as fit
witnesses), have promoted to the sacred and exalted Order of the
Episcopate and have consecrated duly and canonically according to
the manner and rites ofthe Scottish Church, on the 24th day of June
in the year of the Christian era 1796, Alexander Jolly, Master of
Arts, already adorned with the sacred Order ofthe Priesthood, com
mended to us for integrity of life, goodness of morals and for
orthodoxy, and apt and tit to teach and rule. In testimony of which
we have ordered our seals to be appended to this instrument (fortified
beforehand) by our autograph signatures.
" William Abernethy Drummond, Bishop and Primus.
"Andrew Macfarlane, Bishop of Ross and Moray.
"John Strachan, Bishop of Brechin."

Deed of Collation.
" Whereas the Presbyters of the Diocese of Moray, vacant
by the resignation of the Right Reverend Mr. Andrew
Macfarlane, their late Ordinary, have canonically elected the
Right Reverend Mr. Alex. Jolly at Fraserburgh to be their
Bishop, and he has signified his readiness to acquiesce in
"the appointment of the Bishops — therefore it is hereby
notified to all concerned, that We, the subscribing provincial
Bishops of the Church of Scotland, do by these our Letters
of Collation, authorise the said Bishop JoUy, to be Bishop of
Moray, ordering his name to be engrossed in our minutes
with that designation, enjoining the clergy and people of the
said Diocese of Moray, to pay him all due and canonical
obedience, and praying God to bless his labours among them

138 Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
with success, to the glory of His holy name, and the edifica
tion and support of His Church. In testjmony whereof, we
have subscribed these presents at the respective time and
place prefixed to our several subscriptions. '
'"Aberdeen, February 22nd, 1798.
John Skinner, Bishop of Aberdeen and Primus."
" Inverness, February 27th, 1798.
Andrew Macfarlane, Bishop of Ross."
" Edinburgh, March 2nd, 1798.
Wm. Abernethy Drummond, Bishop of Glasgow.'^
" Dundee, March 17th, 1798.
John Strachan, Bishop of Brechin."
"Laurencekirk, March loth, 1798.
Jonn. Watson, Bishop of Dunkeld."

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 139

The Death of Prince Charles Edward.
The clergy of the Church were relieved of a heavy burden
by this sad event. They had remained loyal to the last of the
House of Stuart, many of them to the loss of all their earthly
possessions. The College Bishops obeyed the orders of the
exiled Prince — dictating to them those who were to be conse
crated Bishops and even interposing a quasi x&%?C^ prerogative
in regard to retaining in abeyance the office of MetropoUtan.
These commands must have been felt to be odious, not only
as Erastian in their nature, but as coming from those who
were members ofthe Roman Church. For Rome and Roman
pretensions the nonjurors had no love, one of them, the
Rev. William Harper in 1752, attacking in a treatise the
Popish claim of Infallibility, and another, afterwards Bishop
Abernethy Drummond, wrongly, as we now feel, opposing
the Roman Catholic Emancipation Bill. The following
descriptive notes of the circumstances attending the Death
and Funeral Obsequies of Prince Charles Edward have been
preserved among Bishop Jolly's papers. They must have
gone far to convince him of the mistaken political policy of
his ecclesiastical predecessors.
" By a letter received from Rome, dated the ist inst. (Feb
ruary, 1788), we are informed that Prince Charles Stuart
died there the 31st of January, at hall-past nine o'clock ; his
brother, the Cardinal of York, ordered his body to be con
veyed to Frascati, and is to go himself to-morrow to assist
at High Mass and perfornv the last duties at his funeral.
The particulars of his will are not yet known, as he had
written it at Florence and deposited it in the archives of
that city : they had despatched a Courier for it, who was not
returned at the writing of this letter.
" The Prince has left only one daughter who assumes the
title of Duchess of Albany. She is about twenty-five years
old, much respected for her good nature, piety, and polite
ness. It is thought her father and her uncle the Cardinal,
will leave her an immense fortune.
" He was just 67 years and two months old on the 31st of
January last, the day of his death. He was born on the 30th
of November 1720. He was son to James Francis, Prince of
Wales, son to James II. The son of James II. was recognised
by many Courts of Europe, as King of England, immediately
after the death of his father : as such he received kingly
honours, had his Palace and his guards and enjoyed the
K

I40 Reminiscences qf the Dioceses qf Moray and Ross.
privilege allowed by the Pope to Catholic Kings pf bestowing
a certain number of Cardinals' hats.
" But his son Prince Charles, who lately died, did not enjoy
those honours ; he was indeed called Prince of Wales during
the life of his father, but after that event he would no longer
bear that title, and the Catholic Courts did not style him
King; so that his.situatioii was more agreeable before his
father's death than it has ever been since.
" His mother was the greatest fortune in Europe, She was
the Princess Maria Clementina Sobieski, grand-daughter of
the famous John Sobieski, King of Poland, who beat the
Turks near Vienna and made them raise the siege of that
capital and thus saved Christendom from destruction. She
had a million sterling to her fortune, a great part of which was
lost in the fruitless attempt made by her son in the year 1745,
to place his father on the throne of England.
" She had two sons by her husband, Charies, who lately died,
and Henry Benedict who by his father was created Duke of
York and who having been promoted to the purple has been
generally known by the name of Cardinal York.
" The eldest son married some years ago a princess of Stol-
berg in Germany ; but by her, who is still alive, he has no issue.
He has left, however, a natural daughter, whom he lately
created Duchess of Albany, and to whom he has bequeathed
all the property he had in the French funds, which was very
considerable. " To his brother,- the Cardinal, he has left his claim to the
Crown of England. It is thought that his Eminence will
change his title and assume that ofthe King-Cardinal. His
Eminence is a bachelor and in his 62nd year. At his decease
the King of Sardinia will be at the head of the family of
Stuart as heir to King Charles I., from whose youngest
daughter, Henrietta Maria, he is descended ; the issue of her
eldest sister having become extinct in the person of King
WiUiam III."
Then follows in the Bishop's handwriting this" state
ment : —
" It appears from a late Mercure de France, that the Cardinal
Bishop of Frascati, brother of the late Count of Albany, has
solemnly renounced all titles and .dignities except those he
has hitherto enjoyed. In him the male line of the' Stuart
family is extinct. Sardinia has now pretensions to the Crown
of England, and Stuart, Earl of Traquair, succeeds to the
rights of the great Steward of Scotland."

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 141
In the same handwriting there is also the following ac
count* of the funeral rites performed when the body of
Charles Edward was about to be consigned to its last
resting place in the Vatican : —
" Rome, Feburary 6th. The corpse of the late Charles
Stuart, Count Albany, had scarcely arrived at Frascati, before
the coffin wherein the body had been privately deposited in
this capital, was opened, and found to contain royal robes, with
the Sceptre, Crown, and Sword, together with all the insignia
distinguishing the royal house of the Stuarts. The body
having been recognised, it was placed in a coffin of cypress
wood, inclosed in one of lead, bearing inscriptions and de
vices analogous to the rank ofthe deceased. In the morning
of the. 3rd of this month in the church of Frascati, which was
hung with black, the solemn obsequies were observed with
funeral music by the most celebrated performers of this capi
tal and the pontifical Chapel. Mass was chanted by his Royal
Highness, his Eminency, brother to the late Prince ; and the
four solemn Masses were successively performed by the four
first dignitaries of the Cathedral. To each person who
attended the funeral, a wax taper, weighing three ounces, was
delivered ; but those distributed among the clergy were of
different weights, according fo their respective ranks. On
this occasion a vast concourse of people assembled and par
ticularly of English, almost every one of whom resident here,
obtaining a taper. It is said the remains of the Prince will
be shortly removed to the Vatican and deposited in a decent
urn, by the side of the King his father, and the Queen his
mother."

* Transcribed from the Aberdeen /eurnat oi the nth March 1788.

142 Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
Bishop Jolly and the Vacancy in the See of
Ross and Argyll in 1819.
The Right Rev. Andrew Macfarlane, Bishop of Ross and'
Argyll, died at Inverness on July 26th, 1819, leaving a blank
which was not easily filled up. Several candidates for the
vacancy were spoken of, all of whom possessed good qualifica
tions. Bishop Macfarlane possessed a special qualification, ac
quaintance with the Gaelic language, an accomplishment most
serviceable in a Highland Diocese. The coming election was
regarded with the utmost interest by all the Bishops of the
Church, none being more anxious about the result than the-
three prelates, Skinner, Torry and Jolly, who all resided at
the time in the Diocese of Aberdeen. When they were united
in their plans and opinions this Episcopal triumvirate proved
a powerful factor in the councils ofthe Episcopal College. It
wiU be seen from letters which will be quoted that the last
named Bishop often acted as a reconciler or peace-maker
between the varioqs contending parties in the Church. On
August 2nd, i8ig, the Bishop of Moray wrote as follows to-
Bishop Gleig, the Primus : —
" Mournfully affected by the blank at Inverness and the anxious-
thought which it excites, I am now favoured with your letter worthy
of your official vigilance. I had heard with deep concern ol the
repeated attack upon good Bishop Sandlord's health, and it pains
me much to think of the state of your own. God restore and long
preserve you bo'th !
"Of Mr. M'CoU I never would have thought, hut of Mr. Dean
Paterson (as I presume he is) I own that I had thought. He has
long been a clergyman, knows the Gaelic, has maintained as far as-
I know an irreproachable'character, and if he has in anything like
steady course cultivated some good method of theological study, he
must by this time be pretty well furnished with what in our situa
tion can ordinarily be expected as qualifications for the Episcopate.
But I pretend not to know what is thought of him, nor how acceptable^
he might probably be. Most desirable, however it is, to have such
a man as I would gladly think him to be, for the vacant district
where there is a large field to be reaped by diligent labourers, whom
may our Lord, in mercy send forth, there and everywhere into His^
harvest. " Mr. Buchan of Elgin, whom I know to be a very respectable
clergyman, as he has long been, was some years ago pointed out by
the late Primus as a proper successor, upon the proposal that was-
then made of my removal to Stonehaven, and taking charge of Dun
keld. Failing Mr. Paterson, I could wish that the clergy would
turn their attention to him, that upon the event of my death, which.

Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 143
cannot be far off, having survived all with whom I set out, he might
take the charge of Ross and Moray conjunct as before. In that
case the sixth might be fbund among those of whom you make men
tion. But in the meantime, as I greatly fear, minds are not ripe for
the mention of such a thing, which might occasion to your Reverence
a great deal of trouble and vexation. Pardon the manner in which
I write, of which I begin to be ashamed, and yet in my drooping
state, as it really is, I trust that your goodness will frame an apology
for so naughty a scrawl."
The day after this letter was written. Bishop Jolly pressed
.the consideration of the Ross election upon Bishop Torry.
There were only four electors in the vacant diocese. Not
withstanding the objections of Primus John Skinner, the
Bishops had added Inverness to the Diocese of Ross, and this
-event had some bearing upon the election.< Bishop Torry,
living at Peterhead, was Bishop Jolly's neighbour, so that
¦communication between the two Bishops was not difficult.
Writing as stated to Bishop Torry on August 3rd, 1819,
Bishop Jolly said —
" You now feel as we all must do upon the blank made at Inver
ness — to me, particularly affecting, as having now survived all with
whom I set out, so rapid is the succession ! Lord, bring us all
to meet where friendship in perfection shall never end or be in
terrupted." Soon after this letter was written Bishop Torry made a
suggestion which astonished the good Bishop of Moray, and
the suggestion was, that Ross and Moray should be united
again as formerly, and that Bishop Jolly should preside over
the united diocese. The aged Bishop felt that he was not
able to carry out this proposal, and he replied, that reduced
in strength as he was, even beyond what was apparent, it
would be the dotage of old age, if not rather a presumptuous
sin for him to undertake such a charge. He was sure there
was a very hopeful harvest to be reaped by God's blessing in
Ross and Argyll. Mr Bowdler, the pious and munificent
friend of the Scottish Church, had bestowed much attention
upon the northern See, having placed some young men from
the district in the Theological College of St. Bees in Cum
berland, that having there advanced themselves in their theo
logical studies they might return to the north for the active
work of the ministry among their own Gaelic-speaking
countrymen. The Rev. Mr. Paterson of Arpafeelie and For-
trose, was one of the students sent to St. Bees, and bearing
an irreproachable character. Bishop JoUy thought of him at
once as the future Bishop of Ross. This idea did not find
favour with the other Bishops, and Bishop Jolly proposed the

144 Retniniscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
alternative that Bishop Torry should take Ross and resign
Dunkeld. There was a proposal at that time that Fife should
receive a separate Bishop, and Bishop JoUy thought it would
be wiser to unite Fife to Dunkeld should the latter diocese
become vacant. Writing to the Primus in support of this
idea, on August loth, 1819, Bishop JoUy observed—
"Bishop Torry is as near to the Highlands as I am, and in his
progress, may reap, as I pray God he may, that good health, which
he no doubt, kindly but extravagantly hopes that I might recover
by travelling in those parts. Whereas, one effort, as I am at
present, would most probably kill me. And although that in truth,
would be no loss to the Church, but make room for a better rhan —
yet I must not, even for the best purpose, hecoiae felo-de-se and do
evil that good may come. Sadly do I lament my deficiencies in all
respects and aroused particularly by the dismal genius of the present
time, a compound of infidelity and enthusiasm, ardently wish in
conjunction with all our Bishops and clergy, to exert the utmost efforts
ol official duty, each in his own proper place for the love of Christ,
that we may not provoke Hira to reject us among the lukewarm.-
Avertat, &c. ! "
It has been stated elsewhere in these Reminiscences, that
when Bishop Jolly was elected to the See of Moray it was
intended to annex Inverness to the Diocese of Ross, Primus
John Skinner and the clergy of Mpray protesting against it.
The other Bishops notwithstanding this carried out their
wishes, for Bishop Jolly appended these words to the above
letter written to Primus Gleig —
" Your Reverence does not perhaps know, that at the time of my
election to Moray, Inverness and the western parts of it were
annexed to Ross, by the Bishops that then were. But the clergy of
Moray remonstrated and the Primus was dissentient, so that, I
presume, the Deed is not recorded, but now, at any rate, can be
very easily settled,"
At the present day the clergy and laity of a vacant Diocese
do not like the interference of outsiders in their choice. In
other days it was different, as the Bishops had the power of
refusing any candidate who was not agreeable to themselves.
This right of refusal they sometimes freely put in force, so
that it was generally necessary to consult the Bishops before
proceeding with an election. Perhaps it was then for the
advantage of the Church that the Bishops and the principal
laity interested themselves so much in the filling up of an
Episcopal. vacancy, as the Highland Charges were at that
period few in number, and financially in a very impoverished.
state.

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 145
Writing to Sheriff Forbes, Bishop JoUy strongly advocates
the translation bf Bishop Torry to Ross.
He says : " If what I at present very earnestly press take place,
as I hope it shall, Mr. Low's accession t» us, which was wished and
expected three years ago, would, I think, be very easily effected.
To so remote points as require to be visited in Argyll and Ross,
where there is a great harvest by God's blessing to be gathered, I
am much afraid that Mr. Low's state of health would not allow him
in safety to advance. But I have very strongly suggested the pro
priety of Bishop Torry's taking charge of the vacant district, to
which the clergy, I doubt not, would joyfully elect him ; and his
resignation of Dunkeld would, as I trust, open an eligible place for
ray worthy Brother of Pittenweem. Your consummate prudende
would, I well know, advise that such proposal be kept meantime
entirely inter nos, as we say. For I am strongly suspicious that the
premature mention of it formerly, when it was in design, tended
rather to frustrate it."
Sheriff Forbes appears to have written to Bishop Jolly in
favour of Mr. Low of Pittenweem, and the former suggested
to the Sheriff that he should endeavour to obtain the infltience
of the Rev. Mr. Walker of Edinburgh to gain over the Primus,
so that there should be a " clear majority " of bishops for
Mr, Low's consecration, whether for Dunkeld or Ross.
In August, 1819, Bishop Torry and Bishop Jolly arranged to
visit their respective Dioceses, the former calling at Stirling,
to consult the Primus about the Ross vacancy. Bishop
Jolly again wrote to the Primus on August 20th, 1819, urging
him not to leave so wide a district when there was so hope
ful a prospect of improvement, destitute of Episcopal attention
and care. The Bishop of Moray continued to press upon
the Primus the proposal that Bishop Torry should take Ross
and ArgyU under his Episcopal charge even although he
should retain Dunkeld. Bishop Jolly's letter proceeds as
foUows : —
"Allow me how to say that I feed with delight upon your truly
Christian sentiment and concession, so worthy of your character, so
altogether in the spirit of my great favourite, whose admirable
Homilies lam just now reading, by which you write that you would
without hesitation or reluctance consecrate either of those, whose
misunderstanding by a stratagem of the enemy of peace, has been
for some time so painful to you. Most glorious will such a conquest
prove, and by your compensating solace of it prove tenfold sweet to
you. I must acknowledge that I think of it with great ]oy and
comfort, convinced that it would bring to your good heart a great
deal of content and pleasure, seeing many happy consequences of it,
as long as you live. And long may that be, I do therefore care
lessly write this line, as it comes from my heart, reflecung that if

146 Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
you have any commands, I might have them ere I set out on ray
journey to Elgin as I propose to do (D. V.) on Monday morning the
30th, when Mr. Fyvie intends to meet me ; and I would try to lay
a gentle train for some good design or other. God guide us all lo
think and do what is well pleasing i'n His sight, &c."
On August 2ist, the same Prelate wrote to Bishop WiUiam
Skinner to congratulate the latter upon his obtaining his
Doctor's Degree, being well assured, as he said, that the
Bishop would direct every title and talent to the promotion
of the honour and glory of his Divine Lord and Master.
The elder BaUachelish had written to the Primus deprecat
ing the chance of Mr. Dugald MacCoU's election, which he
added " would be truly astonishing and was not surely to be
supposed." Another candidate for tjie Ross vacancy was
the Rev. Michael Russell of Leith, who was the Primus's;
favourite. The Very Rev. James Walker, Dean of Edin
burgh, and Mr. Low of Pittenweem having offended the
Primus in some way were not favoured by him. On Sep
tember 6th, Bishop Jolly again wrote to Bishop William
Skinner suggesting a meeting of the three Bishops resident
in the Aberdeen Diocese. He said iri this letter —
"It is now a time of earnest prayer and solicitous care for good '
succession to our dear deceased Brother. By Bishop Torry you have
learned the Primus's views and wishes ; and I too have some share
of information. Might we not then meet, as we did last year, in
Peterhead and confer notes upon the important occasion. We might
say verbally, vanishing into air and without echo, what we are not
inclined to commit to paper. Indeed now to see and converse
with your Reverence in particular would to me be a high treat to
enjoy which, I would go to Aberdeen ; but to make a Triumvirate
party, of auspicious omen, is I think, very desirable — that we may
understand each other and draw evenly, cordially united as we are
and ever shall be. It is under this idea that I presume to trouble
you with this short hne and to request a single line in return,
making the appointment, if it suit your conveniency, of some day next
week — the sooner the better. And would you also tell Bishop Torry,
that wemay be sure to find him at home? You and I might meet
at Mintlaw and the remainder of that day in Peterhead would be
quite sufficient. Pray tell me in a word or two and believe me ever
with respectful goodwill to you and yours."
Writing to Mr. Sheriff Forbeson September 7th, Bishop
Jolly said Mr. Walker would make an excellent Bishop.
Objections had been raised against the latter being raised to
the Episcopate, on account of the loss his then charge would
sustain by his removal from it. But Bishop Jolly thought
that this argument, rebus Edinburgen sic stantibus, would
bear as forcibly upon Leith as upon Edinburgh. The pre-

Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 147
vailing idea was in favour of Bishop Jolly's proposal
that Bishop Torry should be translated to Ross and ArgyU,
but it' does not appear th^t Bishop Torry ever seriously
thought of the suggested change of Diocese. Bishop Sand
ford of Edinburgh was absent in the South, very weak in
health. In the visitation of his Diocese at the end of August, Bishop
JoUy ordained two young men as Deacons — Mr. Pressley to be
his own assistant at Fraserburgh and Mr. Low to succeed Mr.
Fyvie who had left Duffus for Inverness. Mr. Fyvie not being
in good health was not able to meet Bishop Jolly at Elgin as
¦the latter wished. The Bishop intended to communicate
through Mr. Fyvie some "quiet intelligence to his Diocesan
brethren." Had the ancient boundaries of the Diocese of
Moray not been altered when Bishop Jolly was elected to
that Diocese, Inverness would, dn the death of Bishop
Macfarlane, have again become part of Moray, and Mr.
Fyvie having become a Clergyman of that Diocese would
have had no vote in tbe Ross election. Writing again to
Primus Gleig in September nth, Bishop Jolly observed —
" The great question is, who is to be the Bishop of Ross, and
soon after of Moray also — as God will I To compliance with whose
holy will, ever good and wise, may He guide aU hearts and minds.
The most sensible of the Clergy, with whom I have had occasion to
converse, as I did, but very cautiously, — entertain the wishful idea of
Bishop Torry's acceptance of the vacant District, that the Southern
Bishop may take charge, where he shall be more nearly resident.
With Mr. Low I have had no epistolary correspondence for 3 years
past and though my dear good friend Mr. Walker has favoured me
with his letters from time to time since his return, he at present, I
find, officiously declines to write to me, that he may not be induced to
touch upon our present circumstances. Still I must acknowledge that I
•do eagerly advert to what you wrote in your first letter with which
you honoured me upon the occasion, earnestly hoping that we should,
by the event to which you referrsd, should it canonically take place,
recover perfect soundness and vigour in our little body, and that you
in particular should have double joy and comfort, in compensation
for what you have so vexatiously suffered. Easily would the affair
be repaired, where there is a ground of so much esteem and deep
rooted sense of worth."
Bishop Jolly having met Miss Duff Macfarlane* at Keith
•during his visit to his Diocese, sent by her some com
munications to Mr. Fyvie, Incumbent at Inverness, On
September isth, 1819, the Bishop wrote to Mr. Fyvie, re-
• Miss Duff Macfarlane, afterwards Mrs. Fyvie, was then considered to be one
¦of the most accomplished ladies in the North of Scotland.

148 Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
questing him to direct the studies of Mr. Low, the deacon
lately ordained as Mr. Fyvie's successor at Duffus. In this
letter Bishop Jolly writes, —
" We are now all very thoughtful, and by our prayers to God,
this week in course (and you, I hope, say the Ember prayers at the
four seasons) solicitous for happy succession to the worthy Bishop
called to his blissful rest. The mournful satisfaction which I felt,
from the conversation to which his most excellent daughter honoured
me in Keith, was indeed very consolatory to me ; and she will im
part to you, perhaps, some particulars of it, reposing entire con
fidence in your prudential use of it, as I also do. I still adhere to
the opinion in which she seemed to coincide, as yet seeing nothing
better in order to fill up the lamented vacancy.
"As to your situation, a matter of no solicitude, as it should be to
yeu — the Episcopal charge of Inverness remaining doubtful (while
your settlement there is sure), the Primus in his letter to me of
August 30th thus for his part writes — ' I will readily agree, etc.,
successor in the chapel. If Miss Macfarlane from Botriphnie be
presently in Inverness, I beg that you will present to her my most
respectful good wishes. For her worthy mother, in these days of
her heaviness, I tenderly feel, but will not trouble her with repetition
of letter, which can' furnish her with no reflections, but Such as are
familiar to her pious mind.' "
The candidate favoured by the Primus for the Ross
vacancy, was, as already observed, Mr. Russell of Leith. In
time, however. Primus Gleig came to understand that his
promotion then was impracticable, and that the elec
tion of Mr. Low of. Pittenweem was almost a determined
point. Bishop Torry would not listen to the idea of resign
ing Dunkeld, or of accepting Ross. On September 20th,
1819, Bishop JoUy writing to Miss Duff Macfarlane, Inver
ness, requested that lady to use her influence on behalf of
Mr. Low, His words to that effect were, —
" And so upon his (Bishop Torry's) refusal the vacancy which we
lament, might for a long time remain in orphan state, against which,
as a very great and general loss, I do strenuously stand up. I am
now then very earnestly desirous that Mr. Paterson (to whom I
know not how to direct a letter) would apply to the Primus without
delay for Mandate, and in conjunction with his brethren among
whom Mr, Fyvie is to be considered at present, would elect Mr.
Low — the undoubted votes of whose brethren to whom he is best'
and has been long known, amount to strong testimony of his worth.
He is also ,most earnestly desired by some of our most respectable
and best lay-friends and particularly by good Mr. Col. Mackenzie,
as a person who would do credit to the Episcopate among us. May
I then presume to beg that by Mr. Fyvie's agency (to whom I wrote
last vveek, but did not then foresee the crisis and danger which I now
mention) measures may be speedily taken to preclude so great a risk f

Reminiscences of the Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 149
It is to be a check upsn that letter which I wrote to him a few days
ago that I now address this to your goodness which will pardon the
liberty taken and direct dear Mr. Fyvie by your penetrating prudence
to meet Mr, Paterson and Mr. Mackenzie perhaps, that they may
jointly forward the important business. It is my ardent solicitude
for the spiritual welfare of Ross and Argyll, &c,, that prompts me
thus to write and go beyond the bounds which otherwise I had set
to myself. When I think of what the worthiest of men, the most
excellent Mr. Bowdler, has done and is doing, I should lament the
Episcopal destitution of so large a country where a great harvest
hy the Divine Blessing is to be reaped. Pardon then my writing
thus hastily upon the sharp spur ofthe occasion."
The meeting of the three Bishops residing in Aberdeenshire
took place on September 22nd, 1819, at Fraserburgh, probably
to spare the venerable Bishop of Moray from journey
ing to Peterhead. At the meeting of this triumvirate.
Bishop Skinner gave it as his decided opinion that the vacant
district of wide extent and great importance ought to have a
separate Bishop. The three Bishops, through Bishop Jolly,
requested Primus Gleig to issue the requested mandate with
out delay, at the same time advising him " in order to pre
clude any inconvenient observation to adhere to the former
mode of individual' subscription and according to the old
form." Bishop Jolly sent a copy of the Form of Mandate to
the Primus that he might have it ready to hand, suggest
ing at the same time that sent from Stirling signed it
might pass from Fraserburgh, Peterhead, and Aberdeen
directly and expeditiously to Mr, Paterson, To Bishop
Torry and Bishop Skinner, the Episcopal Deed was shown
by Bishop Jolly, by which Inverness with its adjuncts was
annexed to Ross. The three Bishops agreed in asserting
that the existence of this document would in the meantime
cause Mr. Fyvie of Inverness to be regarded a, Presbyter of
Ross. In consequence of this, Bishop Jolly wrote to IVlr>
Fyvie on August 2yd, and directed him in conferring with
his brethren of the Ross Diocese, to make use of a formal
declaration to that effect.
Mr. Low's election became more and more probable, the
difficulties supposed to have arisen in regard to it, being
among the Bishops themselves, and not among the electors
of Ross. Disquiering rumours caused Bishop Jolly to write
to Dean Walker of Edinburgh on September 28th, 1819—
" I had begun to consider Mr. Low's accession to us as a settled
point ; and have been at pains to impress the hope that it shall prove-
very beneficial and comfortable to us, forgetting all that is past, and
uniting cordially in the true spirit of Christianity ; for unless we

150 Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
join hearts and heads and hands we cannot thrive. We ought not tp
be blind to one another's foibles, but rather watch and guard against
their unfavourable tendencies; while, in fraternal love, we consider
them our own. Never did I he.ir Bishop Torry say that he would
resist Mr. Low. He is probably afraid that the sores which we
lament may not so soon be healed, whereas I strongly hope that
they shall all very quickly be swegtly cemented and we shall be
come stronger than ever. This, I strenuously maintain, sure that
good Mr. Low would not think of coming among us if he were not
resolved to embrace us all as brethren, joyfully united according to
the beautiful Psalm of this morning (cxxxiii.) The Clergy of Ross and
• Argyll have applied for a Mandate. It was thought at first that Bishop
Torry would accept their election, should it be directed to him. But
he finally declines. Mr. Low has been proposed and they seem
eager to get before Fife, hearing that Mr. Low would undoubtedly
be elected for that, and so they be left destitute, which would truly
be a hard case  The Primus has repeatedly to me asserted
his belief that Mr. Low is a man of sound principles, irreproach-
•able morals, and strong good sense. All meantime inter nos."
After being signed by the Northern Bishops, the Mandate
was sent directly to Ord, where the Rev. Mr. Paterson resided,
he being in charge of Highfield, as well as of Arpafeelie and
Fortrose. The Ross clergy had a wish to elect the Very
Rev. Dean Walker of Edinburgh, but in the following words
written on October 6th, i8ig. Bishop Jolly told Mr. Fyvie of
Inverness that the Dean would not listen to the proposal: —
" A better choice than that of my excellent friend Mr. Walker,
whom I have long and ardently wished to see in, the Episcopate,
you could not in my opinion possibly make ; but too well do I know
that he would not accept. It strikes me, however, that consulting
with the Dean (Dean Paterson), to whom as an old Eicquaintance, I
present my most affectionate remembrances, it would be very well,
previously to your election privately to ask him, and telling him, as
you may safely do, without mention of my name, that Mr. Low had
¦been proposed to you upon the supposition ofhis non-acceptance, beg
his opinion and advice upon that point, as reposing much upon the
soundness of his judgment who has long and perfectly known Mr.
Low. This correspondence might tend very much to brighten your
prospect, and strengthen your hands."
There can be little doubt but the advice given in this letter
w^s acted upon, and that Dean Walker's reply facilitated
the election of Mr. Low. At all events, Mr. Low was duly
elected Bishop of Ross and Argyle. The Bishop of Aber
deen was not pleased at this result, but the news of it
was a cause of great satisfaction to Bishop Jolly, who, writ
ing to Dean Walker of Edinburgh on October 27th, iSig,
said concerning it, —
" Upon the joyful news yesterday received by the Primus's com- ¦

Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 151
munication, I hoped to hear from you, as now I do. Altho' the
journey be rather formidable to me at this season, yet I feel a great
desire to be in Stirling on the happy occasion ; and the melancholy
doubt of good Bishop Sandford's being able to attend, induces me
the more strongly to push forward. I need not say that the hope of
meeting you most affectionately animates and warms my heait. On
this supposition then do you think that you could procure from
Bishop Sandford the loan of Episcopal Dress for that day ? The
Elect, perhaps, would lend me his, not fully vesting himself tUl after
his consecration. I had Bishop Skinner's there formerly, and he
himself appeared fully habited, when he officiated in the evening.
If you then, my dear sir, shall encourage me to go, I will go (D. V.)
Happy and comfortable may all prove I "
Bishop William Skinner was not pleased at the election of
Mr. Low, and he threatened to oppose the confirmation of
the election. But the days for such arbitrary proceedings
had gone by, and the choice ofthe electors could not be set
aside. The aged Bishop of Edinburgh felt unable to go to
Stirling to the consecration, this circumstance making it
almost necessary that Bishop Jolly should undertake the
journey to Stirling. Dean Walker of Edinburgh having
been appointed to preach the consecration sermon, the day
appointed was November 14th, the anniversary of Bishop
Seabury's consecration. Bishop Skinner declared that he
would not be present, from which resolution Bishop Jolly
vainly tried to dissuade him. On October 29th, 1819, Bishop
Jolly wrote to Bishop William Skinner as follows, —
" With deep concern, I think of the painful feeling ofyour mind,
which your fraternal favour of yesterday communicates lo my
participation. The Primus indeed makes use of very strong language ;
but my acceptation reduces such terms 10 very moderate and easy
construction ; and therefore I am not much moved, nor in the least
shaken by them. They are both. Bishop and Priest, I firmly trust,
very Christianly disposed, and each thinking that he needs to exercise
forgiveness towards the other, does it, I doubt not, every time that
he says the Lord's Prayer, as well as when he celebrates and receives
the Lord's Supper. 'Who can read the Gospel, which we all read
yesterday, without feeling in his heart the melting emotions of
Christian charity ! You, my good worthy brother, will regulate all
your designs in that spirit and so act according to the best convictions
of it ; and need no prompting to that purpose.
"It is true that seeing Mr. Low's case in a different light from
that in which your Reverence views it, I had begun and advanced
in a letter under the presumption that I might be able to bring you
somewhat nearer to the point, whence I take my look of it. So far
from being afraid of iU consequences or jarring irritation from his
accession to us, I hope in our Lord's mercy,that it shall prove rather

152 Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross.
salutary to us, healing some little breaches which had unhappily dis
ordered us. But it does not become me to insist. Only, my dear
sir, let me now humbly crave (and I would go down on my knees to
beg it of you !) that you will not found your reasoning upon the
phraseology of the Primus's Letter which would quickly slip from
under you, and leave him and us all, by sympathy in whatever con
cerns our poor afflicted Church, in perplexing difficulties, should the
affair be brought to investigation. Christianity"is not Stoicism and
therefore does not preclude the feeling of injuries although it secures
the instant and absolute forgiveness of them in respect of revenge
and rancotjr, and provides and leaves room for restoration to favour
and friendship upon due repentance. It is this latter for which we
are now solicitous and desire to promote by Mr. Low's consecration.
Blessed then, are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the
children of God, But pardon me for writing thus impertinently, as
some would represent it, to you, who are perfectly pacific and
actuated in all respects by the maxims of Christianity.
"Your worthy warm-hearted brother too, thinks that he has been
injured by us (but I am glad to find that he excepts you) and yet I
am sure that he is well disposed to forgive, as Mr, Low al6o is. I
had lately a very long letter from hiin wholly on that head which
puzzles me exceedingly as to answer, between the respect and regard
to which he is exceedingly well entitled and the silence which we
imposed on ourselves in an affair which we thereby in a manner
rescinded and which I ever think of with pain and blushing. I made
as soothing and satisfactory return as I could ; but it does not satisfy
him, as I find by another letter from him which accompanied yours."
This communication was as a pouring of oil upon the
troubled waters of the late election, and the good Bishop was
comforted by a letter from Bishop Torry expressing his
leaning towards conciliation.
Having done his best to restore harmony among his
coUeagues, Bishop Jolly began to prepare for his journey to
Stirling, a formidable undertaking in those days, for one of
his age and infirmities. Bishop Torry was to set out first,
and he was requested when at Perth to secure quarters for
Bishop Jolly — " WiU you then bespeak a snug little bed-room
(single) easily warmed by a good fire kindled sometime before
arrival of the coach, that a friend of yours, valetudinary, may
retire to it— making the proper acknowledgment for what he
may want there, and not in the travellers' room." The
venerable Prelate also wrote to Mr. Low, the Elect of Ross,—
" My right Dear (and in paulo-post-futurum) Right Reverend
Brother— Accept my best thanks for your most obliging confidential
iavour and receive my n)ost cordial congratulations upon your election
to bedf our humble number. The sentiment which you most pro
perly express, becomes the faithful servant of our Divine Master who
is our Strength as well as our Redeemer 1 "

Reminiscences ofthe Dioceses of Moray and Ross. 153
A week before the Consecration day, on November 6th, the
Bishop of Moray wrote a final letter to Mr. Fyvie, in which,
with a view of restoring harmony, he said —
" Your Elect, the Primus has repeatedly, on the present occasion,
characterised to me as a Man of sound principles, irreproachable
morals, and strong good sense. I sincerely hope therefore that his
accession to the Episcopate shall prove every way happy and
comfortable to us. I am very sorry for good Bishop Skinner's
prejudice on the occasion and still more so for worthy Mr. Bowdler's
mistake and mis-statement, by mis-information of the case. When
he comes to be better informed, he will see that there was no ground
of alarm, and that those worthy gentlemen, on this as on every
occasion, have merited our thanks instead of disapprobation. On
Cyprianic principles and practices which best suit the state of our
humble Church, they have acted with great delicacy, a useful part,
with sincere desire to promote our welfare. But, I presume to say,
they little dreaded the mention of it, which never should have been
made, for its being so grossly misunderstood. If you at any time
write to that most excellent gentleman, try to undeceive him ; and if
you cannot otherwise introduce the subject, inform him of my writing
thus to you, and transmit my very words. Tell him that my worthy
neighbour, Bi.shop Torry, is decidedly of my opinion, and he well
knows that good Bishop Sandford also is.
"Again I entreat you, without delay or waiting for any other
consultation, to write, as most properly devolves upon you, it being
the duty of one of the Electors to do so, that you may assure our
worthy Friend, that no improper tampering had been used in your
Election — the very supposition ofyour being unduly swayed, as you
certainly were not, amounting really to a heavy imputation and
stamping a stigma upon you all — which you should decently but
carefully wipe off. Verbum Sat. God ever guide and keep you."
On Sunday the 14th day of November the Rev, David Low
was consecrated as Bishop of Ross and Argyll at Stirling by
the Primus and the Bishops of Moray and Dunkeld. The
14th of November was a most auspicious day, being the
anniversary of Bishop Seabury's consecration.
Bishop Low after an episcopate of 32 years resigned in 1851,
and was succeeded by Bishop Eden. To Bishop Low the
Diocese of Argyll and the Isles is indebted for its endowment.
May the Great Bishop of the souls of men put it into the
hearts of others in days to come, to confer like benefits upon
our Church.

THE END.

INDEX.

Abbot, Archbishop, 19.
Aberchirder, 78, 81, 85, 86.
Aberdeen Assembly of 1640, 30.
Aberdeen Doctors, 16.
Ahernethy-Drnmmond, Bishop,
93. 97. 108, 109, 121, 124,
127, 128, 130-133, 137-139.
Achanachie, 94.
Achanacie, 68.
Achynachie, Alexander, 35.
• Aikenhead, Thomas, 60.
Airlie, Earl of, 35.
Albany, Duchess of, 139, 140.
AUanbuie, 56, 57, 62, 68, 69.
Andrews, Bishop, 119.
Annand, Rev. John, 27, 28.
Annand, John, 57.
Anne, Queen, 59, 60, 61, 69.
Archibald, Rev, John, 123.
Ardmealli'e, 82.
Argyll, Duke of, 62, 63.
Arnand, M., Doctor ofthe Sor
bonne, 43.
Arradoul, 72, 112.
Atkins, James, Bishop, 42, 51.
Auchinhove, 74-76.
Auldearn, Battle of, 35.
BaiUie, General, 35.
Baillie, Principal, 21.
BaiUie, William, 25.
BaUachuIish, 118.
Balloch Hill, 63, 79.
Barber, William, 78.
Barcklay, Walter, 25.
Baron, Dr. John, 20.
Baron, Dr. Robert, 20-24, 26,
30, 40.
Beaton, Archbishop, 1 1.
Bennet, James Gordon, 121.

Bigsby, Rev. Mr., 114.
Birkenburn, 63, 116,
Blackburn, Bishop, 14, 15.
Blair, J,, 54, 58.
Botary, 24, 27, 28, 30, 32.
Botriphnie, 68.
Bowdler, Mr., 102, 143, 149,
IS3-
Breda, Treaty of, 39.
Brodie, Alexander, 36, 39, 48-
51-
Brodie, of Brodie, 24, 49.
Brodie, David, 47.
Brodie, Rev. Joseph, 24, 25, 27-
33. 36.
Bruce, Rev, Alexander, 109.
Bruce, The, 10.
Buchan, Very Rev. Hugh, 92,
103, 108, 109, 133, 134, 142.
Buchanan, George, 22.
Buchanan, Thomas, 14.
Burns, Robert, National Poet,
IOI.
Caddel (prob. Calder), 59.
Cairnie, 65, 79.
Cairnwhelp, 65, 79, 80.
Calder, Robert, 25.
Campbell, Rev. Archibald, 77.
Campbell's Hole, 71.
Canons, Book of, 25.
Cant, 26, 39.
Cardno, Rev. Mr., 86, 93.
Chalmar, William, 25,
Chalmers, Rev. George, 33.
Chalmers, Rev, John, 13, 14.
Charles Edward, Prince, 70, 71,
8i, 122, 139, 140, 141-
Charles L, 25, 27, 29, 32, 35,
140. L

156

Index.

Chades II,, 37-40, 49, 58, 87.
Chevalier, The, 79.
Cheyne, Rev, Alexander, 68.
Christie, Bishop Henry, 60.
Christie, Rev. Alexander, 68, 81-
86, 92, 97, 133, 134.
Church Society, 113, 131.
Clementius Antonius, 20, 21.
Clova, 97.
Cole, Rev. Mr,, 109,
College Bishops, 109.
Comber's Comment, 94,
Connachar, Rev, John, 75.
Confession Negative, 26.
Covenant, National, 26.
Covenant, Solemn League and,
32-34, 38.
Cottehill (Cuthill), 24,
Coupland, John, of Haughs, 33.
Craven, Rev. J. B,, 57, 65.
Crichie, 99,
Craigivare, Laird of, 25.
Cromwell, Oliver, 18, 36, 38-
40, 48.
Cruickshank, Rev. J. (Muthill),
117. 131-
Culloden Muir, Battle of, 71, 72,
79, 85, 91, 122.
Cumberland, Duke of, 70-72.
Cunninghame, Bishop, 18.
Deer, Old, 86.
Dettingen, Battle of, 70.
Diary of Rev. J. Murdoch, 117.
Dickson, Rev. Mr., 76,
Douglas, Bishop Alexander, 12,
15. 19-
Downie, Isabella, 75-77.
Downie, James, 75-77.
Downie, Janet, 76,
Drumcarbisdale, 37.
Drummond, John, 67,
Drummossie Moor, Battle of, 71.
Duff, Miss (Inverness), 103.
Duff, Miss Goi don of Drum
muir, 123,
Duff, Mrs. T, Gordon of Park,
123.
Dunbar, Sir Archibald, no,
III.

Dunbar, Battle of, 39.
Dunbar, Rev. Gawin, 25,
Dunbar, Bishop Gavin, 18.
Dunbar, Bishop 'William, 54,
68, 69.
Duns Law, 29.
Earl Marischal, 30.
Eden, Bishop Robert, Primus,
122, 123, 153.
Edgehill, Battle of, 34.
Edinburgh, Episcopal Synod at,
1J2, 115.
Edward I., 10.
Election of Bishop Jolly, 98.
Elgin, 47, 103, 112.
Ellis on Divine Things, 103,
Elphinstone, Bishop, 16.
Emancipation Act (Roman
Catholic), 103, 108, 109.
Erskine, John, 60.
Ewing, Bishop Alexander, 118,
119, 121.
Fairfoul, Archbishop, 40, 48.
Falconar, Bishop Colin, 42, 51,
Falconer, Bishop John, 60.
Falconar, Bishop William, 69,
77, 78.
Farr, M'Intosh of, 103.
Fontenoy, Battle of, 70.
Fochabers, 71, 97, 98, 112, 116.
Forbes, Bishop Alexander,
(Caithness), 11, 15.
Forbes, Bishop A. P. (Brechin),
122.
Forbes, Hon. Christian, 21.
Forbes, Elizabeth, 14.
Forbes, Rev. John, 11.
Forbes, Dr. John, 16, 26.
Forbes, John (Black Joke), 63.
Forbes, Lord, 21.
Forbes, Master of, 30.
Forbes, Mrs., 78,
Forbes, Bishop Patrick, 13-20,
26, 42, 121.
Forbes, Bishop Robert, 74, 77.
Forbes, Sheriff, 145, 146.
Forbes, WiUiam, ot Corse, 14,
Forbes, Bishop William, 20, 21.

Index.

157

Forbes, Sir William, 36. '
Fort Augustus, 93, 94.
Fraser, Rev. Alexander, (Bot
riphnie), 30, 32,
Fraserburgh, 80, 93, 95, 96, 98-
100, 124, 133.
Fraser, J., 56, 58.
Frendrucht, The Lady, 31.
FuUarton, Bishop John, 60.
Fyvie, Very Rev. Charles, 103,
109, 114, 118, 146-150, 153.
Gadderar, Alexander, 59.
Gadderar, Bishop James, 60,
68.
Geddes, George, 33.
George, I., 61, 63-65, 67.
George II,, 69, 73. '
George III., 73, 75, 85, 102.
George IV., 103,
Gibson, Patrick, of Kilminnitie,
25. 3o.
Gilchrist, Rev. John, 43, 55"
58, 60-63, 69.
Gillespie, Rev. Mr., 39.
Gladstanes, Archbishop, 11, 12,
19-
Glasgow Assembly, 27, 41.
Glasgow, Major, 71.
Gleig, Bishop, Primus, 142, 144,
147-149, 152.
Glencoe, Massacre of, 60.
Glenshiell, 65.
Gordon, Alexander, of Achan
achie, 25.
Gordon Castle, 35, 66.
Gordon, Rev. Dr., 43, S7j 68,
132.
Gordon, Duke and Duchess of,
109-111.
Gordon, Rev. James, of Kin
noir, 32.
Gordon, Lewis, 65, 72.
Gordon, Mr., of Cairnfield, no,
III.
Gordon, Nicholas, of Glenger
rock, 30.
Gordon, Robert, Baillie of the
Ewzie, 31.
Gordon's Scots Affairs, 20.

Gordon, WiUiam, 68.
Graham, Bishop Georoe, n.
Grant, Laird of, 57.
Grant, Thomas, of Achynachy,
64,
Greenshields, Rev, James, 60,
Grieve, Rev, Mr,, Ellon, 100,
Guthrie, Rev. Mr., 39.
Guthrie, Andrew, 35.
Guthrie, Bishop John, 19, 24,
27-3I-
Guthrie, Rev. John, 24, 25, 30.
Guthrie, Rev. Patrick, 13.
Guthry, James, 25,
Hagar, Rev, Mr., 107, 108.
Hague, The, 39.
Haldane, Bishop Alex. Chin-
nery, 122.
Hamburg, 37.
Hamilton, Bishop Gavin, 12.
Hamilton, Bishop James, 40,
48.
Hamilton, Marquis of, 26-28,36.
Hanover, Elector of, 61.
Harper, Rev. Adam, 65, 66, 79,
Harper, Rev. William, 65-67,
79. 139-
Hay, Rev. George, 69.
Hay, Walter, 28.
Hay, Bishop William, 42, 53.
Henderson, Rev. Mr., 26.
Henrietta Maria, daughter of
Charles I., 140.
Hobart, Bishop of New York,
104.
Holyrood, '70.
Horn, John, Advocate, 66.
Hull, Rev. J. D., 118 120.
Huntly, Marquis of (and Earl),
13, 19, 26, 27, 62, 63, 66.
Hutcheon, John (Keith), 64,
Imlack, Robert, 56.
Inkerman, Battle of, 71.
Innes, Rev. Alexander, 30, 31.
Innes, Sir Alexander, 55.
Innes, Laird of, 47.
Innes, Mrs., ofMuiryfold, 78.
Innes, Thomas, of Pathnick.

158

Index.

Inverness, 103.
Irving, Rev. Robert, 25, 27, 32.
Kairn of Duffs, 92.
Keble, Rev, John. 17, 113.
Kilgour, Bishop Robert, 135,
136.
Kininmont, Rev. William, 36,
37.41-
Kinniinnitie Family, 53-
Kynoch, Mr. George, 121,
Laird Lares, 35.
Lamb, Bishop Andrew, 12.
Langton, Archbishop Stephen,
88.
Laud, Archbishop, 19, 22, 26,
3'-
Laurencekirk, Synodal, 91, 112,
132.
Laurie, Rev, Mr,, 109.
Leighton, Archbishop, 40, 42,
48.
Lesley, Rev. Leonard, 14.
Leslie, General Alexander, 29.
Leslie, General David, 34, 36-
39, 121-
Leven, Earl of, 32.
Lobban, Margaret, 75"77'
Longmore, Mr. William, 121.
Longmore, Rev. William, 73-77,
Longside, 100, 101.
Low, Rev, Alexander, 147,
Low, Bishop, 102, 103, IC9,
112, 115, 118-122, 145, 146,
148-153.
Lucknow, Battle of, 71,
Lycurgus, 106, 107.
Machar's, S., Cathedral, 18.
Macfarlane, Bishop Andrew, 78-
81. 85. 92, 93, 95. 97. 102,
114, 121, 124-138, 142, 143.
Macfarlane's Collections. 68.
Macfarlane, Miss Duff, 147, 148.
Maclarlane, Mrs., 103.
Markets (of Keith), 37,
Mackenzie, Venerable Arch
deacon, 103, 114, 120, 149.
Mackenzie, uf Ord, 121.

Mackenzie, Colin, 148.
Mackenzie, Bishop Murdoch, 41,
49-51-
Maclaurin, Very Rev. Dean,
119.
Macleod, of Assynt, 37.
Madoc's, S., 67,
Magna Charta, 88, 89.
Maitland, Rev. Richard, 28, 30,
33.
Mar, Earl of, 62.
Marnoch, 86.
Marston Moor, Battle of, 34, 36.
Maxwell, Bishop, 23-25, 31, 49,
M'CoU, Rev. Dugald, 147, 146.
M'Farquhar, Rev. W. Pitt, 109,
MeiklefoUa, 76, 81.
Meldrum, Rev. George, of
Glass, 52.
Melville, Andrew, 14.
Melvin, Dr., 22.
Metropolitan, Office of, 139.
Milne, Rev. George, 103, 109.
Milne, Rev. William, 68.
Moffat, Very Rev. H. B., 121-
123.
Moir, Bishop David, 115.
Moidart Bay, 70.
Monro, General, 23, 28-30.
Montrose, Marquis of, 26, 31,
34-38, 47. 121.
Morison, John, 56.
Morrison, James, 63.
Muldarie, House of, 68.
Muldary HUl, 56.
Murdoch, Alexander, 92.
Murdoch, Rev. John, 79, 86, 92-
99, 101-103, 107-109, 112,
113, 115-122, 126,
Murray, Rev. Mr. of Muchalls,
97-
Murray, Mr. (Keith), 55.
Napoleon Bounaparte, 91.
Naseby, Battle of, 35.
Ness Loch, 103.
Newark, 35.
Newmills, 75-78.
Newton, Sir Isaac, 79.
Niagara, 104,

Index.

159-

Ninian's, St., Chapel, Al.er-
deen, 17.
Niven, Mr., 97.
Niven, WUliam, 56.
Nonjurors, 83.
OgUvie, Alexander of Kemp
hairne, 30.
Ogilvie, George, 38.
Ogilvie, John, 33.
OgUvie, Lord, 35,
Ord, James, 66,
Palmer, Henry, 64,
Palmer, Rev. William, 120.
Paterson, Very Rev. Dean, 103,
142, 143, 148-150.
Paterson, Robert, 74-77.
Penal Laws, 73.
Perth Articles, 19, 25.
Peter, Mr. John, 25, 28,
Petne, Bishop Arthur, 77, 79,
81, 114,
Philiphaugh, Battle of, 34, 35,
Phinnie, Alexander, of Couper-
hiU, 25.
Pittenweem, 102.
Pressley, Rev. C, 108, 147.
Prestonpans, Battle of, 70.
Protesters, 39.
Quebec, Battle of, 71.
Raban, Edward, 18, 23, 24.
Ranken, Very Rev, Arthur,
109.
Rebellion of 171 5, 62, 63.
Rebellion of 1745, 70,
Reid, Rev. WUliafii, 33.
Representative Church Council,
116.
Resolutioners, 39.
Restoration, 40.
Robertson, H., 56.
Roman Catholic Emancipation
Act, 103.
Rosarie, 68, 69, 72-74, 78.
Rose, Rev. Alexander, 79.
Rose, Bishop Alexander, 42.
Rose, Dr., 66,

Rose, Katherine, 14, 53.
Rose, Rev. Lachlan, 143.
Ross, Rev. Henry, 30.
Ross, Rev. Gilbert, 47.
Rothiemay, Parson of, 23,27,
31-
Ruddiman, 22.
Russel, Bishop Michael, 115,.
116, 148.
Rutherford, 39.
Ruthven, 78, 80, 81, 85, 86,
93-95, 116; 119.
Sage, Bishop John, 60.
Salmasius, 21.
Sanders or Forbes, Rev. Will
iam, 27.
Sandford, Bishop, 91, in, 142,
151. 153-
Sangster, Kev. Mr., ico.
Sardinia, King of, 140.
Sealrary, Bishop, 85, 106.
Sellar, Rev. Dr., 121.
Shand, Very Rev. Dean, So,
92, 108, 109, 117, 133, 1.^4-
Sharp, Archbishop, 40-42, 48.
Sharp, Archbishop (ot York),
111.
Sheriffmuir, Battle of, 62.
Sibbald, Rev. James, 61-65.
Simpson, Rev. H. D., 123.
Skinner, Rev. J., 104, 107, 135.
Skinner, Very Rev. John, 100,
IOI.
Skinner, Mr, John (of Keith),
62.
Skinner, Primus John, 107, in,
124-135, 138, 143, 144-
Skinner, Bishop William (Pri
mus), 100, 112, 115, 142,
146, 149-151. 153-
Smith, Gilbert, 56.
Sobieski, John, King of Poland,
140.
Sobieski, Princess Maria Clem
entina, 140,
Society, Church, 115.
Sophia,Princes5, of Hanover, 61.
Spang, 22,
Speed, George, 25.

i6o

Index.

Spens, Alexander, 25.
Spens, David, 14.
Spens, Lucretia, 14.
Spottiswode, Archbishop, 11,
12, 16, 19, 35.
Spottiswoode, Bishop, 10, 12,
45-
Spottiswoode, Sir Robert, 34,
35-
Stafford, Earl of, 31.
Steinson, James, 76.
Steinson, John, 75, 76.
Stewart, Alexander, 25,
Stewart, Charles, 55.
Stewart, Captain, 71.
St. Germain's, Court of, 64, 69,
78,
Strachan, Rev. Arthur, 60.
Strachan, Colonel, 37.
Strachan, Bishop David, 42,
Strachan, Elizabeth, 14.
Strachan, Rev. George, 57"6°-
Strachan, Rev. Sir- James, 14,
37. 42, 43. 52-57. 60, 121.
Strachan, Bishop John, (Tor
onto), 42.
Strachan, Bishop John (Brechin),
42, 124, 127, 130, 131, 133,
136-138-
Strachan, Rev. John, (prob.
George), 58, 59.
Strachan, Joshua, 53.
Strachan, Robert, 53.
Strachan, William, 53.
Strathnairn, 103.
Sydserf, Bishop, 22, 40.
Taylor, Rev. John, 109.
Thirty-Nine Articles, 85, 91.
Thomson, Rev, James, 108.

Thriepland, Sir David, 67.
Thriepland, Katherine, 67.
Thriepland, Sir Stuart, 68.
Toleration, Act of, 60, 61, 69,
Torry, Bishop Patrick, 100, 115,
142-153,
Traquair, Stuart, Earl of, 140,
Trinity Church, Keith, 81, 82,
Tulchan Bishops, 45.
TuUoch, Patrick, 25.
Tullochgorum, 100, loi,
TurnbuU, George, 21.
Urquhart, Rev. James, 50,
Urquhart, Rev. Thomas, 50.
Wagstaff, Miss, 109.
Walker, Rev. Dr., 95, 125,
Walker, Primus James, 112, 114,
115, 145, 146, 149-151-
Walker, Very Rev. Dean, 92,
96, 103, 109, 113, 133, 134,
Wat, Robert, 63.
Waterloo, Battle of, 71, 91.
Watson, Bishop, 124, 128, l^i,
138.
Watson, Rev. Robert, 32, 35.
Wellington, Duke of, 109.
Welsh, Rev. John, 11.
William III., 42, 45, 53, 60,
121, 140.
Wilson, Bishop, 121.
Wodrow, 16.
Worcester, Battle of, 40.
Wormiston, Spens of, 14.
"Wow" of Ruthven, 80, 86,
116.
York, Cardinal, Duke of, 139-
141.

EDINBURGH :
PRINTED BY ST. GILE.s' PRINTING COMPANY,
JOHNSTON TERRACE

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 04077 3054

>',.*

'»W;^

^^^^

' ,-

.^ Hi

*-V*r*'

tf4

¦ iigiMByjmiii  wj