"The Chiefs of Grant" (1883) by Sir William Fraser
Volume I, Chapter 13

SIR JOHN GRANT, SIXTH OF FREUCHIE, KNIGHT. MARY OGILVIE (OF DESKFORD) HIS WIFE. 1622-1637

[197] In a comparatively uneventful period of the national history, Sir .John Grant succeeded to and swayed the destinies of the Grant estates. These were at this time no inconsiderable possession. His influence upon them is traditionally said to have been of a somewhat injurious nature, owing to an alleged profuse and expensive style of living, frequent attendance at Court, and making Edinburgh his principal residence. It was undoubtedly the case that the Grant estates were greatly extended by Sir John's father, the fifth Laird, while, on the other hand, James, the seventh Laird, eldest son of the subject of this memoir, succeeded to the paternal inheritance under circumstances less favourable than those existing at the entry of his father, but the facts respecting the life of Sir John Grant, and his management of the Grant estates, disclosed by the family papers, do not support the spendthrift character attributed to him.

Sir John Grant was the only son of John Grant, fifth of Freuchie, and Lady Lilias Murray, and was born on 17th August 1596. Vol. iii, of this work, p. 221. His education was partly superintended by Mr. Patrick Inglis, afterwards minister of Kirkwall, who, in a letter to Lady Lilias Murray, dated Kirkwall, 29th November 1631, offers to take charge of the education of the sons of Sir John, if he had any. "He sal be trained vp at scholles," he says, "and I sal be his pedagog, and sal be als Cairfull of him as euer I was of his father." Vol. ii. of this work, p. 56.

Before he had attained his eighteenth year, John Grant, younger of Freuchie, was contracted in marriage to Mary Ogilvie, daughter of Sir Walter Ogilvie of Findlater, Knight, afterwards Lord Ogilvie of Deskford. The contract was made at Elgin on 11th December 1613, and by it the Laird of Freuchie, elder, agreed to infeft his young son and his wife in the lands of Mulben, Muldaries, Forgie, Auldcash, Bridgeton of Spey, and [198] neighbouring 'lands, with others in Strathisla, the whole forming an estate of considerable dimensions in the parishes of Boharm and Keith, and guaranteed by the Laird of Freuchie to be worth forty chalders of victual yearly, with other casualties. The dowry given by Sir Walter Ogilvie with his daughter was £10,000 Scots, the disposal of which was decided by the terms of the contract. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 413. The entry to the lands was to be given at the term of Whitsunday following, and the marriage was probably celebrated about that time.

After his provision to the lands of Mulben, and during the lifetime of his father, John Grant, younger of Freuchie, was more commonly designed "of Mulben," and this was soon afterwards amplified into "Sir John Grant of Mulben," by the dignity of knighthood being conferred upon him. From a comparison of documents there is reason to conclude that this honour was conferred upon the young Laird by King James the Sixth on the occasion of his visit to Scotland in 1617. The demand on the Laird of Freuchie to furnish capercailzies and ptarmigan from the Highlands for King James when he should reach Newcastle, was made at the end of the month of April 1617. Page 191 antea. The King was in Edinburgh in June following, and held a Parliament there on the 17th of that month. It was probably then that the dignity was conferred; when a similar title is said to have been bestowed upon a near neighbour of the Grants in Strathspey, and one with whom the Lairds, elder and younger, were at this time closely associated, Lachlan Mackintosh of Dunachton. The Mackintoshes and Clan Chattan, by A. M. Shaw, p. 300. But further, on 10th May 1617, the young Laird of Freuchie, as such, granted a bond for four hundred merks to John Abernethy, Original Bond at Castle Grant while on 19th August 1618, he signed an agreement with James Lord Stewart of Ochiltree for the purchase of the lands of Auchindaren in Strathisla, as Sir John Grant of Mulben, Original Contract ibid. thus clearly showing that the knighthood was conferred sometime between these two dates.

As mentioned in the memoir of his father, Sir John Grant was much associated with him in transactions of a public nature, and in the later [199] years of his father's life he bore, to a considerable extent, the burden of the management of the estates. Journeys to Edinburgh to attend to law pleas and similar business were at that time a necessity to landlords in the country. Of two such journeys made in 1620 by the young Laird to the metropolis, and of his proceedings there, an interesting record exists in the accounts of Gregor Grant, apparently of Gartinmore, his chamberlain on those occasions, which have been preserved. Printed in vol. iii. of this work, pp. 322-334

The young Laird took journey south on Tuesday, the 1st of February, the company consisting of six gentlemen on horseback, attended by nine "boys" or gillies, and one led horse. The route chosen was by Foyness, the residence of John Grant, younger of Ballindalloch, where they passed the first night; thence proceeding by Blackwater, Boat of Artlache, Kirk of Tullanessall, Boat of Don, Alford, Kincardine-on-Dee, Mureailhous, Fettercairn, and Forfar, they arrived in Perth on the evening of the sixth day. The next day and evening were spent in Perth, and on the 8th February the journey was resumed by Bridge of Earn and Falkland to Burntisland. From this place six of the gullies were sent home with the horses, and the following day was occupied in crossing the Firth of Forth from Burntisland to Leith. Being belated, the Laird put up for the night at Effie Wilson's house, apparently an inn, in the Canongate, and only entered the city on the following day, the tenth after leaving Strathspey. The account further narrates that the Laird took up his abode in John Home's fore-chamber.

On this occasion the young Laird remained nearly a month in Edinburgh, and having engaged the services of Mr Thomas Hope (afterwards Sir Thomas Hope, the distinguished lord advocate to King Charles the First), Mr. Thomas Nicolson, and Mr. James Oliphant, both eminent advocates, as counsel, in company with whom frequently appears John Belsches, he carried through a considerable amount of law business, including letters of suspension against two ministers, Mr. David Dick and Mr. William Clogie, letters of horning against the Laird of Moyness, letters of lawburrows and spoilzie against the men of Strathern, and a summons of warrandice against Mr. Patrick. But the principal cause which engaged the skill of counsel was [200] a litigation between the Laird of Freuchie and George Lord Gordon, eldest son of the Marquis of Huntly, which had arisen in the following manner: Mr. William Douglas, Treasurer of Moray, had procured letters of horning against the Laird of Freuchie for payment of the teind duties of the lands of Forgie and Auldcash, which were held by the Laird from the Marquis of Huntly. Considering that by virtue of these letters the lands had fallen into his hands, Huntly gifted them to John Gordon of Buckie, and the young Laird of Freuchie now sought. by this action before the Lords of Council and Session, to reduce the letters of horning with all their consequents. By means of a douceur to the macers, the Laird obtained right of access to the Tolbooth at all times needful, and a payment of £11 Scots, for what purpose is not stated, was made about the same time to the Clerk of Session, Mr. Alexander Gibson. A consultation with counsel was held on Wednesday, 16th February, before the calling of the reduction, in consideration of which fees were paid to the advocates, Mr. Thomas Hope, as principal, receiving the larger fee of two pieces, probably double angels, valued at £26, 1 3s. 4d. Scots, the other two advocates two rosenobles each, or £21, 6s. 8d., and John Belsches received one double angel, value, £13, 6s. 8d. To the clerk of each advocate a payment of £3, 6s. 8d. was given, with the exception of Mr. James Oliphant's man, who, as he had the process in charge, received the sum of £5 Scots.

Apparently by the Lord Advocate's influence the Chancellor was prevailed upon to allow the case to be heard on the 25th of February, and as, during the hearing, there seemed a probability of .the Court rising before the pleadings were concluded, the services of the bellman were secured, by a gratuity of twenty-four shillings, in the way of "halding bak the twelft hour till the caus wer reasoned at lenthe." The stratagem succeeded, and the act of litiscontestation was pronounced that day. Three days later, when the Act had been booked, or registered and extracted, the "aduocatis fauour keithit wes rememberit," and in addition to five pieces, equal to £66, 13s. 4d., given him on the day of hearing for calling the case, he now received in consideration of his favour, "conforme to ane pactioun preceding," the sum of £333, 6s. 8d. The Laird's own counsel, of course, were also duly remembered.

[201] At this stage of the proceedings, the young Laird and his company returned home, taking their departure from Edinburgh on Friday, 3d March. The chamberlain, however, was left to watch the further progress of the litigation, as Lord Gordon had moved to get the Act obtained by the Laird rescinded. The case was again heard by the Lords of Council and Session on the 15th March, when several witnesses from Auldearn were examined, and received from the chamberlain "doles" and money "to tak thame hame." The following day was occupied by a consultation between the Laird's counsel, as a result of which the chamberlain was instructed to proceed to Coldingham for Mr. William Douglas's Mr. William Douglas had, by this time, ceased to hold the office of Treasurer of Moray. approbation of his own discharges granted to the Laird, as there was "nothing moir wantit that rnycht serve the turne." This was done, and in addition, an "officer of armes" was despatched from "the toun of Duns in the Mers, to Coldinghame," to charge Mr. William Douglas "to gif his athe vpoun the reasones of the libell."

At the desire of Lord Gordon the cause was to have been heard and concluded on Saturday, the 25th March, but the Laird's advisers, deeming that this might not be for his interest, by a somewhat shrewd expedient balked the Lords of part of their work. The Clerk of Session had been secured as a friend, and with his assistance the process was wanting when called for. The Chamberlain narrates the matter thus: "The clerk haifing takin in the proces to haif bene concludit, the Lord Gordoun, our aduersare pa irtie, haifing vrgeit the calling thairof himself, we feareing his vehemencie, and not knowing what he hade to say, be convoy of the clerk, James Gibsoun, abstractit the kuist and hail proces for that day, so that thair wes nothing thairintill at that tyme." The services of the clerk were also given in another form, in the person of his son, "young Mr. Alexander Gibson," to whom the Laird, before leaving Edinburgh, had given two rosenobles, equal to £21, 13s. 4d. Scots, and who flow received other two pieces of a higher value, evidently double angels, "for his paynis in solisting and making ane grite number of the Lordis vpoun our syde." On the Tuesday following, the 28th March, the case was heard before the Lords, and they again gave decree in the Laird's favour.

Lord Gordon, however, still held out, and it was in connection with [202] the same litigation that the young Laird undertook the second journey to Edinburgh. On this occasion he was accompanied by six horsemen and their "boiys," and the route chosen was by Strathgarry and Strathtay to Burntisland. Leaving Strathspey on Monday, the 26th June, the company reached Blair Athole that evening, Huntingtower on the following night, and Burntisland on the evening of the 2 8th. Here, as before, the horses were sent back, and passage taken for Leith, on the way to Edinburgh, where the Laird resumed his lodging in John Home's fore-chamber, on the 1st of July, after putting up for two nights at Effie Wilson's in the Canongate.

The hearing of the case was appointed for the 22d July, but before that date Lord Gordon yielded and agreed to a submission. This arrangement may have been effected through the instrumentality of the Earl of Mar, as on the previous evening the Laird was in attendance on the Earl at Holyrood, and the submission was unknown to the counsel in charge of the case. On intimation of the fact being made to the Judges, they requested that counsel should not be told, in order that they might hear the pleadings; "the President aduising us not to lat our aduocattis know of the suhmissioun past amangis ws, hot to suffer the mater be reasoned in heest measour, so that we suld sie hou the mater suld go in cais it hade not bene packit vp be submissioun." The issue was that the Lords pronounced an interlocutor assoilzing Sir John Grant from the first reason urged by Lord Gordon, finding his exception relevant thereanent, and appointing him a day in November for proving the same. After this deliverance, "and forsarneikle as the said exceptioune wes in effect the resoune of the said Johniie Grant his summondis of reductioune, and that the said Johnne Grant in the first instance led and deducit proba tioun for proving thairof, and provit the samen sufficientlie, as the said first decreit reductive proportis, sua that the said Johnne Grant will maist certainile prove the samen our agane," and "nawayis being willing to truble and vex the said Johnne Grant off Frewquhy be law any furthir in the said matter," Lord Gordon, for himself and his father, placed in the hands o the Laird a formal ratification of the decreet of reduction obtained by the latter on the 28th of March. Original Deed of Ratification, dated at Edinburgh, 25th July 1620, at Castle Grant.

[203] The Laird's purpose in coming to Edinburgh being thus happily accomplished, he set out on his return journey on Monday, the last day of July, at midnight, a douceur of twelve shillings Scots to the porter at the Nether Bow enabling him to obtain egress from the town at that late hour. Repose, however, was secured at Leith, and the journey was resumed next morning by Burntisland to Perth, thence by Lochend in the Stormont and Strathardle to Strathspey.

During his journeys, and also during his stay in Edinburgh, the Laird displayed a benevolent generosity to the poor met by the way, and also to travelling minstrels such as pipers, "whissilleris and drummeris," and others, vocal and instrumental, who came to his lodgings. "Drink silver" to waiting maids and men was also liberally dispensed, while the "tas" at the door of Trinity College Kirk, where the young Laud frequently attended, was duly remembered. Tobacco, and sometimes a pipe, had to be procured for the Laird, and "aill" and sweet wines were the usual drinks provided at dinner and supper. Frequently also "worme woode aill" was required as a morning draught. While on his second visit, the Laird found that several of his people had arrived in town as witnesses in some petty plea between the Lairds of Ballindalloch and Carron, which they wished to bring before the Lords of Council. This the Laird would not permit, as detrimental to his credit and that of the clan. So he took the matter into his own hands, and, "hailing satlit the particulare all to the witnessis expenssis, quhilk they culd not agree vpoun," before he "suld lat thame lous agane and be hard befoir the counsall in sic idle and nochtie actiounes to thair disgraces and their cheiffis also, he being in the toun, resolved to pay the expenssis."

On the death of his father, Sir John Grant of Mulben became Laird of Freuchie, and succeeded to all the Grant estates. These were now so extensive, and the holdings so various, that the completing of the titles to them under their several superiors was a work requiring a considerable expenditure of time. On a precept from James Earl of Murray, Original Precept, dated 22d October 1622, at Castle Grant. he was infeft in the lordship of Abernethy, and shortly afterwards in the lands of Muldaries, on a similar mandate from John Earl of Rothes. Original Precept, dated 6th December 1622, ibid. Precepts from [204] Chancery ordained his infeftment in Glencarnie and Ballindalloch, the baronies of Freuchie, Cromdale, Lethen, Urquhart, and Corriemony, with the lands of Glenloy, Locharkaig, Glenspean, and Glenroy in Lochaber, and the office of bailie and stewart of the lordship of Lochaber, Original Precepts, dated 3d April 1623, at Castle Grant. and sasine was taken in these in the following month. Original Instruments of Sasine, Ibid. In the church lands of Strathspey, Rothiemurchus, Laggan, Finlarg, and the others held in feu of the Bishops of Moray, the Laird was infeft in 1624, Original Instrument of Sasine, dated 24th May, ibid. but a year later he resigned them into the hands of John Bishop of Moray, Original Procuratory of Resignation, dated 17th May 1625, at Castle Grant. and received a charter of regrant, Original Charter, dated 18th May 1625, ibid. which was confirmed in a charter under the great seal by King Charles the First. Original Charter, dated 26th July 1625, ibid.

Lachlan Shaw says of Sir John Grant of Freuchie, that he "entered into possession of his fortune with every advantage, but by the profuse and expensive style in which he lived, his frequent attendance at Court, and residing chiefly at Edinburgh, he considerably impaired it, and sold the estate of Lethen, one of his father's acquisitions, to Alexander Brodie." History of Moray, p. 32. Tradition has also applied to him the soubriquet of Sir John Sell-the-land, and one writer adds that the epithet originated when the Laird was made a knight. Playfair's Baronage, p. 385. Before making inquiry into Sir John's management of the estates, it may be remarked that, although he appears to have paid more frequent visits to Edinburgh than previous Lairds, it was not to give attendance at Court, which tradition-mongers seem to forget had been removed from the Scottish metropolis to London, but either in connection with the business of his estates, or in obedience to the commands of the authorities. The only known instances of Sir John's attendance at Court, were on the occasion of the visit of King James the Sixth to Edinburgh, already referred to, when the Laird received the honour of knighthood, and a subsequent attendance at the Court of King Charles the First in London in 1631. The two visits to Edinburgh, described in the fore going pages, were of short duration and were evidently made only at the instance of the young Laird's father, and in the capacity of agent for him.

[205] Sir John's next visit to Edinburgh was in the winter of 1622, when he negotiated a contract with Alexander Lord Spynie for the purchase from the latter of the patronages of the churches pertaining to the chancellary and subchantry of Moray, situated in and around Strathspey, and also in Urquhart. This was a step of manifest importance, and one which must have contributed in no small degree to heighten the influence of the Chiefs of Grant. Under the old ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the exercise of the kirk patronages by the clergy throughout the Grant domains was tolerable, but it must have been far otherwise when a neighbouring lay lord possessed a right of jurisdiction over the interests, spiritual or other wise, of the Laird's dependants. The churches comprised in the contract, of which the advocation, donation, and right of patronage were purchased by Sir John Grant, were those of Kirkmichael, Inveravon, Knockando, Urquhart, Glenmoriston, Rafford, Ardclach, Cromdale, Advie, Abernethy, Kincardine, and Duthil. The price paid is not mentioned, but it was given at the making of the contract. The terms of this arrangement are fully narrated elsewhere, Vol. iii. of this work, p. 428. but one condition was that Alexander Lord Spynie and the Laird of Freuchie should exercise the right of presentation alternately. As the Laird was also possessed, and took steps to confirm himself in the possession, of the teinds of these churches, this measure seems an anticipation of what a few years later, under the direction of King Charles the First, became the universal rule in Scotland, when the titulars of the teinds were obliged to sell their right thereto to the possessors of the lands from which the teinds were paid.

Apparently for the purpose of giving these patronages an heritable form, they were attached to the 40s. land of new extent of Easter Bunlaod in Urquhart. These lands were accordingly resigned by Sir John Grant, Original Procuratory of Resignation, dated 30th July 1623, at Castle Grant. and the patronages were resigned by Lord Spynie, for a regrant of the lands and patronages to the Laird and his heirs-male, in terms of the contract. A charter thereof was duly obtained from King James the Sixth, on 12th February 1624, Original Charter at Castle Grant. and sasine was taken by the Laird in the same year. Copy Instrument of Sasine, dated 25th August 1624, ibid.

[206] To consolidate the lands of Easter and Wester Muldaries and Bogbend, in the earldom of Rothes, first obtained by the Grants in 1507, with the lands of Balnabreich, lying in the same earldom, and more recently acquired, Sir John Grant resigned them in the hands of the superior, John Earl of Rothes, for a regrant to himself and his heirs-male. Original Instrument of Resignation, dated 31stJanuary 1628, at Castle Grant. The charter granted by the Earl thereupon erected these lands into a free tenandry, to be held in feu-farm for the yearly rent of £8, 8s. Scots. Original Charter, dated 1st February 1628,

Sir John Grant also succeeded in adding the barony of Cardells or Pitcroy to the family possessions, a task which the three Lairds who preceded him had successively undertaken but had failed to effect. This barony, comprising the lands of Cardell-moir, Cardell-beg, Delnapot, Smiddiecroft, and Pettincroy, with a mill and fishings on the river Spey attached thereto, was situated in the southern portion of the parish of Knockando in Morayshire. It was bounded by the lands of Knockando on the east, the water of Spey on the south, the lands of the Bishop of Moray on the west, and the lands of the Brae of Moray on the north, and it was separated from the lands of Ballindalloch only by the Spey. Original Instrument of Sasine, 12th November 1629 at Castle Grant. The barony had formed part of the possessions of the Friars preachers of Elgin, and as such afterwards fell into the hands of the burgh of Elgin. In 1527 Cardell was feued by James Ogilvie of Cardell, son of Alexander Ogilvie of Deskford and Findlater, The Mackintoshes and Clan Chattan, by A. M. Shaw, p. 188. but in 1539 it was granted by John Spens, Prior of the Friars preachers of Elgin, to Alexander Grant, brother-german of John Grant of Ballindalloch, for a feu-duty of £20 Scots yearly. A contract between James Grant of Freuchie and Alexander Grant of Cardells, drawn up in form of a notarial instrument in 1551, reveals the fact that the barony of Pitcroy had been forcibly taken possession of by the Laird of Freuchie and retained for some time, and that a litigation had ensued. By this contract Alexander Grant renounced all litigation and cause of litigation against James Grant of Freuchie on these grounds, and obliged himself to infeft the Laird in the barony; the Laird, on his part, obliging himself to grant assedation to Alexander Grant of the lands of Cardell-beg for his lifetime. He also became bound to pay one [207] hundred merks to Alexander Grant, for which the latter was to serve the Laird and his heirs; and in the event of Alexander Grant's dying without surviving issue, he was to leave all his moveable goods then upon the lands of Cardells to William Grant, a younger son of the Laird. Original Instrument, dated 26th July 1351, at Castle Grant.

This contract appears to have remained unfulfilled during the lifetime of Alexander Grant, and upon his death his relatives ignored its existence. George Grant, son of John Grant of Ballindalloch, was nephew and heir to Alexander, and he at once obtained himself infeft in the barony on a precept from the Preceptor of Maison Dieu, near Elgin. Instrument of Sasine dated 20th December 1585, Old Inventory, ibid. Immediately thereafter George made it over to his youngest brother, John Grant in Foyness, afterwards Tutor of Ballindalloch, who at once procured his own infeftment therein. Instrument of Sasine, dated 23d December 1585, Old Inventory, ibid. This obliged John Grant of Freuchie, great-grandson of James Grant, the Laird who had made the contract, to institute a legal inhibition of these proceedings.

An interdict was obtained against the transfer of the lands by George Grant to his brother, Inhibition, dated 25th February 1383, at Castle Grant. but apparently it was ineffectual, as, two years later, John Grant of Freuchie had recourse to friendly measures, in pursuit of the same object. He obtained an obligation from John Grant in Foyness that the latter would produce to the Laird and his friends all charters and other documents, by virtue of which he laid claim to the barony of Cardells. If these were found authentic and proper, then he bound himself to give security that he would either resign or dispone the barony in favour of the Laird, whom, in the document, he acknowledges as chief and master. Original Obligation, dated 31st May 1588, ibid But neither was this method successful. The Laird of Freuchie then approached Patrick Grant of Ballindalloch, brother of George and John, who had an interest in the matter, both on account of his relationship to the parties, and on account of a curious matrimonial contract made between him and the last Laird of Freuchie, which also embraced the lands in question. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 397. The Laird persuaded Patrick Grant to execute a bond, obliging himself among other things, to cause the heirs of George and [208] John Grant to renounce their claims upon the barony, and also to renounce any claim he himself might have thereon. Bond, dated 23d November 1613, in Extract Decreet of 1627, at Castle Grant. But the engagement was all that could be obtained; the Laird of Ballindalloch would neither fulfil the terms of the contract, nor give the necessary consent to its registration, Extract Decreet of Lords of Council and Session, dated 20th February 1627, ibid. and John Grant of Freuchie did not pursue the matter further.

Sir John Grant, however, assailed the matter with determination and vigour. While managing the estates for his father, he obtained letters of inhibition against Patrick Grant, eldest surviving son of the now deceased John Grant of Foyness, who was holding back from service as heir to his father, to prevent him selling, wadsetting, or in any way whatever disposing of the lands in dispute, and in the letters his resolution is expressed to "persecute the foirsaid actioun vnto the finall end and decisioun thairof." Original Letters of Inhibition, dated 24th February 1621, ibid.

Notwithstanding this procedure, Patrick Grant disponed the lands to John Grant, fiar of Ballindalloch, Original Disposition, dated 20th November 1624, ibid. but the Laird of Freuchie was not disposed to be dealt with as his predecessors had been, and he at once entered the lists with Ballindalloch, and summoned his opponent before the Lords of Council and Session, produced the contract of 1613, and obtained an order for its registration with execution to follow thereon. Extract Decreet, 20th February 1627, at Castle Grant. This virtually ended the contest, and a new contract was made between the Laird of Freuchie and John Grant, younger of Ballindalloch, Extract Contract, dated 19th March 1628, ibid which had this advantage over those formerly made, that it was implemented. Sir John Grant obtained infeftment in the barony of Cardells, Instrument of Sasine, dated 12th November 1629, ibid. but he had previously to pay the sum of two thousand six hundred merks, which was due by young Balindalloch in respect of the lands to the Preceptor of Maison Dieu, and the Provost, Bailies, and Council of Elgin. Original Discharge, dated 13th November 1629, ibid.

At the same time, Sir John Grant succeeded in obliging the Lairds of Ballindalloch to renew their bonds of manrent at every occasion of entry to their lands held of him as superior. This had been unsuccessfully [209] sought by Sir John's father, but Sir John insisted on it, not only as customary, and as conducive to "amitie, love, and friendschip," but "as becomes to be betuix ane cheiff and his kinisman, and ane superiour and his vassell." Extract Contract, dated 19th March 1628, at Castle Grant. The Laird of Freuchie was bound to grant a bond of maintenance in return, and if the Laird of Ballindalloch refused to give his bond of manrent, the Laird of Freuchie reserved power to refuse the precept necessary for infeftment in the lands held of him.

The system of wadsetting portions of the Grant estates has been supposed to have originated in the time of Sr John Grant. But in reality it was begun by his father, the fifth Laird, so early, at least, as 1593, vol. iii. of this work, p. 293. and frequently resorted to during the latter years of his life. No testament by the father of Sir John has been discovered, and the want of it, and of a relative inventory of his personal estate at the time of his death, prevents any accurate knowledge of the condition in which he left the estate. From another source, however, it may be inferred that the large purchases of land made by the fifth Laird, combined with the heavy fine imposed upon him on account of the shelter given to the outlawed Macgregors, had not only drained away the ready money at the Laird's disposal, but also rendered borrowing a necessity. Hence it was that only eight months after her husband's death, Lady Lilias Murray took what measures she could to lighten the pecuniary difficulties of her son. " Considering," she says, "the great burdine of debt that Sir Johne Grant of Frewquhye, knicht, my well beluiffit sone, lyis wnder, and 1, as a maist luiffing and tender hartit mother, willing to help him be all the meanes I can," she renounced in his favour certain lands in Cromdale in which she had been infeft by her husband, reserving only the customs paid in kind for her liferent use. Original Disposition, dated 17th May 1623, at Castle Grant.

Lady Lilias did more than this to accommodate her son. He had followed the example of his father in wadsetting a number of the lands, raising in 1623 no less a sum than twenty thousand merks thereon, but one of these wadsets, amounting to half that sum - over the lands of Duthil, Tullochcruben and Kinveachie - he redeemed within a few years. During the ten years between 1623 and 1633 he wadset other lands to the extent [210] of forty-four thousand five hundred merks, among which were the lands of Muldaries for twenty-two thousand merks, and the barony of Lethen for twelve thousand merks. The barony of Lethen had been purchased by the late Laird and bestowed up6n his wife, Lady Lilias Murray, for her support during the remainder of her life, but she must have given her permission to her son to raise money upon it. The wadset was effected in 1626. But the barony did not then pass from the possession of Lady Lilias, being given back in lease at a yearly rental of twelve hundred merks. This arrangement, however, did not long continue, as on 14th March 1634 Sir John Grant sold Lethen, and some adjacent lands, to Alexander Brodie of East Grange, for one hundred and five thousand merks. Original Contract at Castle Grant. To enable the sale to be effected, Lady Lilias, or Lady Lethen, as she was then styled, renounced her right to the lands, and in return Sir John Grant secured to her rents in Duthil, of the value of three thousand merks annually. Original Contracts, dated 19th March 1634 and 21st December 1635, ibid. Lady Lilias thereupon took up her residence at Ballachastell, the terms of her doing so being the subject of a formal agreement between mother and son - that as Lady Lilias was content to remain in household with Sir John, while she did so, the latter obliged himself to honour, reverence, and entertain her honourably and dutifully according to her estate. with her servants, and Lady Lilias obliged herself to remit to her son, for every year she abode with him, one thousand merks of the three thousand due by him to her as her annual portion. Original Agreement in duplicate, dated 21st December 1635, at Castle Grant.

For the same reasons, Sir John Grant twice exchanged the jointure lands of his wife, first in 1627, for the lands of Lethen and others, Vol. iii. of this work. p. 437. and afterwards in 1634, when Lethen was sold, for lands in the lordship of Urquhart and others. Ibid. p. 444. In both documents a similar motive for the trans action is expressed. that he and his spouse, acting by advice of their "honourable friendis and weill willaris," considered that it was necessary and expedient for the Laird, and for the singular weal, standing, and benefit of his house, estate, and living, that he have the full right and title of the lands in question in his own person, that he might freely sell, wadset, and dispone thereupon at pleasure, for defraying of his debts and burdens. [211] In addition to the church patronages and the barony of Cardells, Sir John Grant purchased from James Lord Stewart of Ochiltree the lands of Auchindaren, in the barony of Strathisla. Original Disposition, dated 19th August 1618, at Castle Grant. He also redeemed some of the wadsets made by his father; but his own additions to that unprofitable system commenced by his father on the Grant estates, must have impoverished the revenues of the Laird to no small degree, and was certainly felt by the succeeding generations. One beneficial feature of the system was that as the wadsetting was confined as far as possible to the chief's own family or members of the Clan Grant, it raised around the chief a band of proprietors of his own name, though of lesser rank, who each represented and, when occasion required, appeared at the head of the tenants of their respective properties. It has also thus been rendered possible distinctly to trace the cadet branches, until the suppression of the system of wadsetting, and the consequent withdrawal of their territorial designations, have left their later descent in obscurity.

Before leaving the question of the management of the family estates by Sir John Grant, it only remains to note the sale of the pine woods of Abernethy, Kincardine, and Glencarnie for £20,000 Scots, effected by him in 1630 to Captain John Mason, on behalf of the Earl of Tullibardine. All the trees in these districts were placed at the Captain's disposal, to cut and transport, or otherwise to dispose of them as he pleased, during the space of forty-one years from the date of the contract. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 442.

With the improvement of the family residence of Ballachastell Sir John Grant appears to have taken some pains. He evidently wished to embellish the interior with works of art and beauty. A letter from Ralph Rawlinson, apparently a sculptor, informed Sir John that twelve of the beasts he had ordered were perfectly ready to be transported to Ballachastell, and that the rest would be in the same condition shortly. He added that he had made choice of the rhinoceros and gorgon in place of the two beasts which the Laird had desired to be omitted. Original Letter, dated 22d August 1629, at Castle Grant. In another letter from the Laird to John Anderson, a painter in Aberdeen, the latter is requested to send home the four portraits given him to be "mowlerit" or cleaned. The Laird adds, "I [212] mynd (God willing) to bring yow to Ballachastel) efter Whitsonday for expeding of my gairie, seing I mynd to enter wrightes for sylling Covering or lining with wood. of the same as yow show me efter Marche, for it can be no shooner done, seing syling quhilk is done in winter cannot be close. And I pray you hawe fyne colours for paynting of the same, and gold also for painting of the four storme widowes." Original Letter, dated 10th December 1634, at Castle Grant. The portraits referred to as the property of Sir John Grant do not appear to have been preserved. The oldest family portraits now at Castle Grant are those of James Grant, the eldest son of Sir John, and his wife Lady Mary Stewart. which have both been lithographed for this work.

In his relations with neighbouring chiefs Sir John Grant pursued a uniformly peaceful policy, and not unfrequently interposed his influence for the pacification of their feuds, or, when circumstances required it, for their rescue from imminent disaster. Such an opportunity occurred soon after his succession to his father. The Clan Cameron and Clan Chattan were at feud with each other, though Lachlan Mackintosh of Dunachton had refused, at the bidding of the Marquis of Huntly. to appear in arms against the Camerons, and had on that account incurred considerable odium and damage, as was narrated in the preceding memoir. This was on the occasion of Huntly's obtaining the commission of fire and sword against the Clan Cameron after Lochiel had put twenty-two of his own followers to death for conspiring against his authority at Huntley's instigation. At the same time, those who had the care of John Cameron, Lochiel's eldest son, were charged by the Privy Council to produce him to them, that they might take order regarding his education and the peace of the country. For their justification in so doing the Lords of Council say that Lochiel, "of his awne naturall dispositioun being aiwyse inclynnit to murther, treachone, and rebellioun, it is verie liklie that he sail trayne up Camroun his eldest soun in that same wicked course of lyff, and now in his young aig instruct him in all these policyis, insolencyis, and misdemeanours wherewith he himself during the haill progres of his bypast lyff hes bene exerceisit." This charge is dated 9th December 1613. Registrum Secreti Concilii, H.M. Register House, Edinburgh.

[213] Lachlan Mackintosh held the heritable office of bailie and steward of the lordship and stewartry of Lochaber, and in that capacity proclaimed his intention to hold courts within these bounds in July 1616. Viewing this as a slight upon his own authority in Lochaber, Cameron of Lochiel mustered two hundred of his clan, who, " "all bodin in feir of weir with bowis, dorlochais, durkis, Lochaber axis," etc., took up their position at the ford of the river Lochy. On the approach of Mackintosh, the Camerons "schott ane number of musketis and hagbutis at the said Lauchlane and his cumpany, and stayit huin fra halding the saidis courtis." Register of Privy Council, quoted in the Mackintoshes and Clan Chattan, by A. M. Shaw, pp. 298.300. Memoirs of Sir Ewen Cameron of Lochiel, pp 58, 59.

The Laird of Mackintosh reported the matter to the Privy Council, in consequence of which Lochiel was summoned to answer for his conduct. As he did not appear. decree was pronounced against him, non-compliance with which placed him and his clan in the position of rebels, and letters of intercommuning and a commission of fire and sword were procured by Mackintosh against the Camerons in 1618. He also obtained a decreet of removal against Lochiel from the lands of Glenlui and Locharkaig. One result of the encounter consequent upon the commission was that John, eldest son of Lochiel was captured. and imprisoned in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh. Ibid. The lands of Glenlui and Locharkaig in Lochaber were really at the root of the contention between the Mackintoshes and the Camerons. Originally the property of the Mackintoshes, these lands had been taken possession of by the Camerons, who resisted all attempts made for their recovery.
In 1598 these lands were forfeited by Lochiel, and he then entered into an agreement with Lachlan Mackintosh respecting them, which was to last for nineteen years, and any breach involved serious penalties. The attack upon Mackintosh was considered such a breach, and in the position in which Lochiel then stood with the Government, Mackintosh easily succeeded in obtaining the decreet of removal.

Having incurred the resentment of the Marquis of Huntly, Mackintosh was diverted for a time from the pursuit of the Camerons. But it was only temporarily. He procured in 1 622 a still more formidable commission from Court against Lochiel, to be carried out, not only by himself, but by Colin Lord Kintail, Sir Rorie Macleod of Harris, the Lairds of Freuchie, elder and younger, Sir John Campbell of Calder, John Grant of Glenmoriston, Patrick Grant of Ballindalloch. John McDonald McAllane VcEane of Ilantyrurn, captain of the Clan Ranald, and others. King [214] James the Sixth, incensed that Lochiel still stood out in his rebellion, "oppressing his neighbours, and beheaving himself as if there were neither king nor law in that our kingdom," instructed the Privy Council, by letter dated 6th May 1622, to expede the commission. Memoirs of Sir Ewen Cameron of Lochiel, p. 60. In the commission, which was issued in the following month, the King is made to refer to the reduction of the Highlands and Isles to obedience, at great pains and expense, and the establishment of quietness, peace, and justice "by the power and force of our auctoritie, and by our prudent and wyse gouerna ment." It then proceeds: "Thair is onlie one lymmair, to witt, Allane Cameroun of Lochyell, that lyis onte and refuiss to give his obedience, who, having maid shipwrack of his faith, and prorneist obedience, and shaking of all feare of God, reuerence of the law, and regaird of justice, not onlie continewis in his rebellioun as gif he wer nouther subject to king, law, nor justice, hot hes associatt vnto himself a nomber of otheris lymmaris, by whome and with whose assistance he intendis, so far as in him lyis, to interteny ane oppin rebellioun, and to disturbe the peace and quiet of the Heighlandis and Ilis." Vol. iii. of this work, p. 334

Fortunately for Lochiel, Sir Lachlan Mackintosh died before his intentions could he carried out, and the chief conduct of the commission devolved upon Sir John Grant of Freuchie, as uncle and tutor to William Mackintosh, the son of Sir Lachlan. In this capacity Sir John, in December 1622, preferred a petition to the Privy Council. Lord Gordon had obtained a commission to proceed against the Earl of Caithness, and was now craving permission to employ his removable tenants in that service. Among the principal of these were the Clan Chattan, and Sir John represented that if these were withdrawn in the service of Lord Gordon, he could not proceed with the execution of his commission against Lochiel. The Clan C1hattan, he said, were the special persons on whose assistance he relied, seeing the action was in a manner their own, where unto he was only accessory in favour of his young sister's son, their chief. He therefore requested that the Clan Chattan might be reserved from Lord Gordon's service, and that he might have added to his commission the concurrence of the whole inhabitants of Moydart, Glengarry, Morar, [215] Strathgarry, Athole, Rannoch, and Balquhidder, being the bounds nearest Lochaber. The petition was the more urgent inasmuch as Lord Gordon was proposing to set out on his expedition at the same time that Sir John intended "to go fordwart aganis Allane." The prayer of the petition was granted. Memoirs of Sir Ewen Cameron of Lochiel, Appendix, pp. 386, 387. at Castle Grant.

But, notwithstanding the terms of this petition, which was made in the interest of his ward, Sir John Grant was by no means desirous to adopt hostile measures against Lochiel. Towards this the memory of the friend ship between Lochiel and the late Laird of Grant, Sir John Grant's own peaceable disposition, and the fact that his wife, Mary Ogilvie, was an aunt of Lochiel, may all have contributed. In any case, instead of proceeding to extremities, Sir John initiated negotiations for pacification of the feud. He obtained a licence for himself and others to intercommune with Lochiel, on condition that lie treated first with him to return to his allegiance, and only after that about the differences between him and the Mackintoshes, Vol. iii. of this work, p. 220 and the licence was afterwards continued till the end of July 1623. Original Extract Warrant, 31st March 1623 Some correspondence passed between the parties. and then a conference was arranged to be held at Abertarff between Lochiel and certain friends, who had offered themselves as cautioners, and Sir John Grant and others. Lochiel granted a bond of safe-conduct to Sit John and his company, Vol. iii. of this work, p. 223. and. the meeting took place at Abertarff on 11th July 1623. It may be presumed that Lochiel had previously given evidence of his loyalty to King James and time law, as the meeting appears to have been almost entirely occupied with the settlement of the differences between Lochiel and Mackintosh, the latter being represented by Sir John Grant.

The terms of the agreement were that Allan Cameron of Lochiel should obtain a lease of the lands of Glenlui and Locharkaig during the remainder of William Mackintosh's minority, at an annual rental of twelve hundred merks, half of which was remitted as the interest of a wadset of half the lands, made about 1598 by Sir Lachlan Mackintosh to Lochiel, for six thousand merks. On attaining majority, William Mackintosh could, [216] if he pleased. redeem the lands within a specified period. All the woods on these lands were reserved to the Laird of Freuchie, who expressed his intention of selling them for the benefit of his nephew's estate, and security was given by Lochiel that the purchasers and workers would be respected, he receiving the tenth part of the price for which the woods should be sold. Original Minute of Agreement at Castle Grant

These terms of agreement were formulated in a contract subscribed by the parties and their cautioners, an abstract of which is given elsewhere. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 431. The contract shows that on his part Sir John Grant undertook to procure a complete remission for Lochiel for all past transgressions, and to obtain the release of his son John from the Tolbooth of Edinburgh; and also that Lochiel promised to appear before the Privy Council, and give security for his future good behaviour. Sir John discharged his part of the agreement by procuring the remission and the release of John Cameron, after the latter had signed the contract as one of the parties, and there is abundant evidence in the letters of Lochiel that he regarded Sir John's efforts to save him and his family and clan with a keen sentiment of gratitude. Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 42 et seq. This feeling was no evanescent one, for after Sir John's death, when Montrose was in the north, and the Laird of Moyness had been plundered by a party of Camerons, Lochiel wrote deploring the "misfortun accidente," which he says had happened during his absence in Argyll, and his friends "knew not that Moynes was ane Grant, but thoct that he was ane Morray man," adding that in "Morrayland" "all men taks thair prey." Ibid. p. 76. In another letter on the same subject he says, "The Leird of Grante was the onelie man I loue beiste in the northe." Ibid. p. 77.

The Mackintoshes, however, as a clan, were not well satisfied with the management of the Laird of Freuchie during their chief's minority, and with this piece of business in particular, and it was not long before the question was reopened, to become as great a bone of contention as formerly. On the death of Sir Lachlan Mackintosh, Sir John Grant, as already stated, had become Tutor to the young chief of the Clan Chattan. The late Laird of Freuchie had purchased the gift of the ward and non-entry with the [217] marriage of William Mackintosh, the young chief, for Sir John Grant, and Sir John obliged himself not to dispose of this right without advising with and obtaining the unanimous consent of James Master of Deskford, Mr. .James Grant of Logie, Sir Rorie Mackenzie of Coigeach, Sir Roderick Mackenzie of Coigeach laid claim, in 1624, to a share of the gift of the ward and marriage of William Mackintosh, on account of a wadset held by him of the barony of Culloden. (Vol. ii. of this work, p. 50.) and Patrick Grant of Ballindalloch. The same consent was made essential to any disposition by Sir John of the lands of Glenlui, Locharkaig, Glenspean, and Glenroy, which are Stated to have been acquired by the late John Grant of Freuchie with "great trawellis and paneis" from the late Sir Lachlan Mackintosh in wadset. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 423. These lands, or part of them, were those disponed to Allan Cameron and his son John, in wadset and feu, and the transaction has been charged upon the Laird as. the procuring cause of trouble to the Mackintoshes. The Mackintoshes and Clan Chattan, p. 322. But for what he did Sir John Grant had the fullest authority from his nephew's kinsman, William Mackintosh of Borlum, Lachlan his brother, Lachlan Mackintosh of Killachie, and others, in a letter signed by them at Urquhart, before the meeting with Lochiel took place. Letter, dated 7th July 1623, at Castle Grant.

It is also said that after the young chief attained his majority, an inquiry into the management during his minority was made, with the result that legal proceedings were about to be taken against Sir John Grant. but were averted by the interposition of friends, who induced the parties t agree to arbitration. The writer of the Kinrara Manuscript, who was brother to the young chief, says that in 1632 Sir John Grant wilfully kept a large sum of money from his ward's estate, by refusing to sell some of the timber on Mackintosh's Lochaber lands, which the Marquis of Tullibardine was desirous of purchasing, in order that he might "draw a bargain his own way," by inducing the Marquis to take his own woods in Abernethy. The Mackintoshes and Clan Chattan, p. 312 The Marquisate of Tullibardine was only created in 1703. But Sir .John had, prior to 1632, disposed of his own woods of Abernethy, and consequently had at that time no inducement of the nature suggested to impede the sale of the Lochaber woods. From letters addressed to the Laird by a. correspondent in Edinburgh, it appears that a determined attempt was made by the Mackintoshes [218] to bring Sir John Grant into litigation, Original Letters, James Gibson to Sir John Grant, dated 2d July and 28th October 1636, at Castle Grant. but, according to the Kinrara MS., the matter was arranged by arbitration, wherein Sir John was ordained to pay to his nephew £10,000 Scots, though less than a fourth of the sum claimed, and payment of which was not obtained without difficulty and delay. The Mackintoshes and Clan Chattan, p. 321 A sum of £10,000, due to William Mackintosh of Torcastle, was one of the debts mentioned by Sir John Grant on his deathbed. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 230.

It was during Sir John Grant's wardship of the young chief that the members of the Clan Chattan came into conflict with the Earl of Murray, who had in 1622 ejected certain of their number from the lands possessed by them from time immemorial in Petty. For a time they were restrained by the sage counsels of Angus Williamson of Auldtirly, but he was now dead, and the evicted members of the clan, with their sympathising kinsmen, still rankling with the injury inflicted by the Earl of Murray, mustered to the extent of two hundred, and under the leadership of their young chief's uncle, Lachlan Og, and the son of Angus Williamson, they invaded and robbed the tenants who had been placed in their old holdings in the lands of Petty, besieged the recently-erected Castle Stuart, drove out the Earl's servants, and possessed themselves of the rents of the lands. Having accomplished all they could in Petty, they "fell in sorning throw out Morray, Stratharik, Vrquhart, Ross, Sutherland, Bray of Mar, and diuerss vther pairtis, taking thair mete and food perforce quher thay culd not get it willingly, fra freindis alssweill as fra their faes, yit still keipit thame selfis fra schedding of innocent blood." Spalding's Memorialls of the Trubles in Scotland, vol. i. pp. 1-4. They openly avowed having taken this course to get back their possessions in Petty, or failing that, their resolution to keep the country in commotion.

To repress this disorder, the Earl of Murray brought three hundred Macgregors from Menteith and Balquhidder, but they effected nothing, owing, it is supposed, to sympathy with the Mackintoshes. Failing in a second attempt, the Earl betook himself to Court and obtained a commission of lieutenantcy in the north, which enabled him to issue letters of inter communing against the Mackintoshes, and by this means, cutting off their [219] supplies, he reduced them to sue for terms. The Earl afterwards held courts, at which a number of persons who had assisted the Mackintoshes after the publication of the letters of intercommuning, were, on the evidence of those they had befriended, convicted and heavily fined. John Grant of Glenmoriston was one of those arraigned for reset of the Clan Chattan, and he appealed to the King, putting himself to much trouble and expense, but was obliged in the end to arrange with the Earl. Spalding's Memorialls of the Trubles in Scot. laud, vol. i. pp. 5, 9. The Mackintoshes generally escaped punishment after a few insignificant members of the clan had been sacrificed to appease the claims of justice; and as Huntly had been annoyed at the Earl of Murray's appointment, he befriended the Mackintoshes, who, by his efforts, were restored to their lands in Petty.

William Mackintosh, the young chief, was in no way implicated in this affair, his clansmen having determined their own conduct, knowing that by reason of his minority, he could not be involved under the terms of the general band of 1587, but, as Sir John Grant was so closely connected with him, he was the recipient of several friendly letters of warning from the Earl of Mar, in one of which he counsels the Laird to recover the house of Culloden which he says the Council had heard he had delivered to Lachlan Mackintosh, one of the leaders of the Clan Chattan, otherwise it might tend to his injury. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 51. Probably the Laird used his influence to terminate the disturbance, as in a letter from Darnaway, Lord Erskine, who accompanied the Earl of Murray north, expresses his pleasure that Sir John was "so kynd a freind" to Lord Murray, and desires him to come to Darnaway on the morrow to converse with the Earl and himself on this business. Original Letter, dated 9th October 1624, at Castle Grant.

Sir John Grant also maintained the friendship which had subsisted between his father and Ranuil McAllan of Lundie, cousin to the chief of Glengarry. Ranuil McAllan of Lundie was son and heir of Allan McAlister, younger son of Alexander Macdonald of Glengarry. This is apparent from a discharge by Allan McRenalt VicAllane of Lundie, son of Ranuil, to Sir John Grant of Freuchie, for certain of his writs which Sir John had in keeping. The principal of these mentioned are: Charter by Angus McAlester of Glengarry to his brother, Allane McAlester and his heirs-male, of the two merk land of Lundie, and others, dated 21st January 1571; Letter of Maintenance by Angus to Allane, dated 20th January 1571; and a Precept of Clare Constat by Donald McAngus McAlister to Renalt McAllan, as heir to his father, Allan, dated 10th December 1575.
[220] Before his death, the late Laird had borrowed from Donald McAllan Vic Ranald, apparent of Lundie, three thousand merks, Sir John becoming surety for their repayment; and they were afterwards duly paid. This debt was contracted under two bonds, 1625, at Castle Grant, dated respectively 23d May and 27th October 1621. Original Discharge thereof, dated 10th November. Shortly afterwards Sir John entered into an agreement with Allan Renalt, apparent of Lundie, who, with advice and consent of his eldest son, Donald McAllan Vic Renalt, and taking burden for his father, Renalt, that he should ratify the agreement, thereby sold to Sir John all the woods and growing trees on certain of his lands in Morar. These, the contract relates, were altogether unprofitable to their proprietors, who had never reaped, nor could they at any time reap, any advantage therefrom, but on the contrary had not only great expense in keeping and guarding the same continually against thieving neighbours, but incurred hatred and deadly feuds on that account. No merchant would venture to buy the woods, on account of the risk of losing his life. A lease of the lands whereon the woods grew for thirty-one years, was given to Sir John Grant, and he under took to sell them, and give two-thirds of the price he obtained to Allan McRenalt and his heirs. Vol.. iii. of this work, p. 424 It indicates the vigour with which the Laird began to fulfil his obligation, that, six days after the signing of the contract, he obtained a writ of lawburrows against Angus McCoull VcRannald in Morar, Donald Grant McVcAllaster in Knoidart, and others, who were cutting and destroying these woods, to find caution not to molest him in the possession and working of the woods.

Meanwhile a tardy vengeance had overtaken the Laird of Lundie for what has been known as the "Raid of Cilliechriost," in which he had been a principal actor, in the year 1603. This exploit has hitherto been considered one of the most sanguinary instances of Highland revenge, and surprise has been expressed that so terrible an instance of private vengeance should have occurred in the commencement of the seventeenth century without public notice being taken of it. Gregory's Highlands and Islands, p. 303. The hitherto received story of the Raid of Cilliechriost is, that in 1603 the Macdonalds, under the leadership of Allan dubh McRanuil of Lundie, pursuing their feud with the Mackenzies, [221] made a raid into Brae Ross, plundered the lands of Cilliechriost, and ferociously set fire to the church during divine service, when full of men, women, and children, and when the flames forced the worshippers to seek means of escape, mercilessly hewed them down, or thrust them back into the flames. To drown the dying shrieks and cries of the imprisoned Mackenzies, Glengarry's piper marched round the blazing building playing the tutie since known by the name of "Cilliechriost," and forming the family pibroch of the Macdonalds of Glengarry. History and Genealogy of the MacKenzies, pp. 156-162, where still fuller details are given of the alleged horrible event and its sequel.

Though punishment was long delayed, the raid was not entirely overlooked by the authorities, but the real affray, as represented to the Crown, dwindles in to comparative insignificance beside the embellished forms in which tradition has handed it down to posterity. Allan of Lundie was required to find caution that he would compear before the Justice Clerk to answer to the charge laid against him, but as usual when the case was had, to avert imprisonment, he preferred to remain among his native hills, and allow his friends to arrange afterwards for his extrication, and in consequence of his non-compearance, he was denounced a rebel, put to the horn, and his estates forfeited. The date of the forfeiture was 28th June 1622, and on 7th December following, Sir John Grant procured the gift of the escheat of Allan of Lundie in his own favour. The letter of gift narrates the causes of the forfeiture, which, on account of their importance in regard to the "Raid of Cilliechriost," may be here narrated in full. After the usual preamble in the king's name, mentioning the donator and the nature of the goods and gear escheated, it proceeds:

Quhilkis pertenit of befoir to Allane McRanald of Lundie in Glengarie, and now per tening to ws, fallin and becum in our handis and at our gift and dispositioun be ressoun of escheit throw being of the said Allane McRanald, vpone the tuentie aucht day of Junij last bypast, ordourlie denuncit our rebell and put to our borne, be vertew of our vtheris lettres raissit and execute againes the said Allane at the instance of Mr. Johne McKenzie Archie deane of Ros, for himselff, and as maister, with the remanent kin and freindis of vmquhile Alexander McCaye, John McCay, Donald McCaye his sone, Alexander Gald and.... tennentis and servandis to the said Mr. Johne, of his toun and landis of Kilchriste, and als at the instance of Sir William Oliphant of Newtoun, knycht, our advocat, [222] for our entres, for not finding of sufficient cautioun and sovertie to our Justice Clerk and his deputtis actit in our buikis of adjornall that he suld compeir befoir our Justice and his deputtis, and vnderly the lawis for the tressonable and wilfull raissing of fyre, and cruellie and vnmercifullie murdering and slaying of the said vmquhile Alexander McCaye, vmquhile Johne, and vmquhile Donald MeCayis, and Alexander Gald, and.. tennentes to the said Mr. Jon McKenzie of the said toun and lands of Gilchriste, burning and distroying of the number of tuentie sevin duelling houssis within the said toun, with the barnes, byres and killis belanging thairto, and burning and destroying of the said Mr. Johne his haul librarie and buikes, togidder with tuentie scoir bollis aittis, and aucht scoir bollis beir, being in the said Mr. Johne his harne and barnezaird, and thifteouslie stealling and away taking of nyne peace of hors, with the said Mr. Johne his awin best hors, thrie scoir ten oxin and ky, and that in the monethe of September, the zeir of God jmvjc and thrie zeiris, the tyrne of the feid than standing betuix vmquhile Kenneth Lord Kintaill and Donald McAngus of Glengarie. Original Letter of Gift at Castle Grant

This narration divests the raid of Gilliechroist of its traditionary horrors, and reduces it to the dimensions of an attack by a party of the Macdonalds, under Allan dubh McRanald, upon the Archdean of Ross, who, being a Mackenzie of prominence, would be peculiarly obnoxious to the raiders. The resistance of the Archdean's tenants to the attack on their Laird probably incited the Macdonalds to extend their destructive operations to their dwellings in addition to that of the Archdean, and in the strife several of the tenants were slain. It is impossible to suppose that had any terrible sacrilege and cruelty taken place such as tradition relates, it would have been omitted from the charge against the Laird of Lundie, especially when the Archdean himself was the author of the process.

Considering the debt due by Sir John Grant to the Laird of Lundie, and the fact that the contract making over the woods had been effected after the forfeiture had been declared, the procuring by Sir John of the gift of the escheat was a prudent step. He was not, however, permitted to use his right of intromission with Lundie's estate, as the latter resisted, and a decree of declarator was obtained on 29th July 1623, affirming Sir John's right to the escheat, Original Extract Decreet, Ibid but apparently with little effect. The Laird, however, appears to have continued to befriend Lundie, who granted a bond of manrent to Sir John Grant on 29th August 1626, in which he declares that the Lairds of Freuchie had been the placers and maintainers of him and [223] his predecessors in their lands, and had also defended them in their lawful affairs heretofore. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 224. Sir John shortly afterwards granted an assignation of the escheat, leaving the assignee's name blank, Original Assignation, dated 22d November 1626, at Castle Grant. but a letter by Alexander Baillie of Dunean, in subsequent proceedings, to a law-agent in Edinburgh, shows it to have been made in his favour. These later proceedings were occasioned by a second forfeiture incurred by Allan McRenalt, when the Laird of Glengarry, who appears to have borne the appellation of Donald Bane, purchased this escheat, although that acquired by the Laird of Grant was not yet discharged. Indeed an information sent with the letters by Alexander Baillie asserts that Allan McRenalt "hes the hail guidis and geir in his possessioun, and that the said Laird of Grant nor his assigney was never in possessioun of no pairt thairof." But Baillie was also friendly to the Laird of Lundie, and acted along with Sir John Grant for his benefit. In sending the documents for the process against Glengarry, Baillie says, "Hold Glengarrie off the best you can to our nixt adverteisment quhilk wilbe or Cristmes nixt . . . and I pray you earnestlie be cairfull heirin, and lat not this man (Allan McRanald) be wrongit in your power in sua far as reason or moyen can cane him throw." Original Letter, dated 28th October 1633, at Castle Grant.

While thus engaged with affairs at home, Sir John Grant was suddenly called upon to contribute to the public service. When King Charles the First was engaged in his expedition for the relief of the Protestants of Rochelle, he included in it a regiment of Scots under the command of William Earl of Morton. The expedition sailed from the Isle of Wight on 27th June 1627, under the leadership of the Duke of Buckingham, and took possession of the Isle of Re, near Rochelle, and the little town of St. Martin, but were unable to reduce the fort. While the English fleet lay before Rochelle, the King, evidently desirous to reinforce his Scotch regiment, wrote to Sir John Grant asking him to raise as many men as possible with the assistance of his friends, and send them to Edinburgh against the 15th of September, whence they were to be transported to France for service. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 7. Sir John responded to the appeal, and [224] raised the men, but was unable to be forward by the time appointed, and latterly he wrote that he could not keep the assignation at Leith until the 20th of November. Viscount Dupplin replied that he would endeavour to accommodate others and the ships for that day, but that no news had been received from the Earl of Morton since he departed. Original Letter, Viscount Dupplin to Sir John Grant of Freuchie, dated Perth, 28th October 1627, at Castle Grant.

That the laird was earnest in this matter, and even strongly desirous that his clan should distinguish themselves in foreign service, the following letter from James Grant of Auchterblair, who was appointed captain of the company to be sent, will show. It is addressed to Lady Lilias Murray, Lady Lethen, who seemed concerned with respect to the effect on her pecuniary resources of the despatch of the men

Auchterblair, xvj day of November 1627.
MADAM, - My humble seruice being rememberit to your Ladysehip, I receawit your Ladyschip's lettir, and the caus quhairfoir I wreit not ane answer to your Ladyschip I wes of mynd to haif spokin your Ladyschip, bot now I fear I mey not win in respect of schortnes of tyme. As quhair your Ladyschip wreit that I wes the motionar of the Laird to send away his men in respect I wes so weill willit myself in spring tym, trew it is, in the begin ing of the yeir the Laird wes sorie and lamentit sindrie tymes that thair wes not on of his kine that wald go out of the cuntrie with ane cumpanie of men, althocht he wad furneis the cumpanie. Sua finding him verie ernest in this bissines, I desyrit him to try his freindis in this bissines; giff he wald not find ane vther, that I suld go and furneis ane pairt of the curn panie my selfl provyding he haid gain or credit be our going. Aiwayis, to be schort, eftir he haid insistit ane long tyme vpone this cours, it faillit in him self. As for this last bissines, on my concience I knaw not how it corn one, or quhat credit or gain he hes be it, hut it is the moist ernest bissines that ever I saw the Laird vndertak, and will on no con ditioun go fra it, althocht he suld wair ane pairt of his estait for to execut the samyn. So I being ever redie to the baird, althocht I ryppit littill commoditie or gain for the samyn, I haif vndertain to go this weage with his men, becaus he wald on no wayis let me be on gone. Sua, as God salbe my judg, I am blamles of all the Lairdis doingis, except that 1 wes ever redie to him. And in ane pairt I am glaid to liaif ane excuis to be quyt of his fesrie, feiring that no thing gois rycht. Gif I mey oniwayis I will speak your Ladyschip befoir I go. Committis yow to God eternall.
Your Ladyschip's seruand ever to death,
JAMES GRANT. Original Letter, ibid.

As for your Ladyschip's lettir ye wreitt for, your Ladyschip is no wayis oblissit to pey money in it. yit nochtwitlistanding I be thir presentis, for me, my airis, executouris, [225] assignayis, discherges your Lady schipe, youris airis, executouris, or assignayis of all sowmes of money ather restand presentlie, or wes restand be band, messiues or vther wayis preceid ing the dait heirof, he this my discharge, wreittin and subscrywit with my hand at Auchtir blair, the sextein day of November jmlvjc tuentie sevin yeiris.
JAMES GRANT. Original Letter at Castle Grant.

It does not appear that Sir John's men ever left the country, or perhaps Strathspey. If they did get so far as Leith, it would only be to hear of Buckingham's dishonourable retreat, after being repulsed by the French at Rochelle, and his subsequent landing on the west coast of England in November. Historical Works of Sir James Balfour, vol. ii. pp. 158, 159. The company of men, however, were afterwards considered a promising body from which to recruit Colonel Hamilton's Scottish contingent serving in Sweden tinder Gustavus Adolphus, and the Laird of Grant received urgent requests both from the Earl of Tullibardine Original Letter, Earl of Tullibardine to Sir John Grant, dated at Theobalds, 27th April 1629, at Castle Grant and the Marquis of Hamilton Vol. ii. of this work, p. 14. to levy as many of them as he possibly could for that service.

Sir John Grant, while he wielded a salutary influence in the pacification of feuds among his neighbours, was greatly harassed in his own country of Strathspey by turbulent spirits of his own name, for whom, under tile terms of tile general band, the Government considered him in a measure responsible. Sir John had also been appointed convener of the Justices of Peace within the bounds of Inverness and Cromartie, Ibid p. 13. and from time to time he received special and general commissions of justiciary affecting his own arid the surrounding districts. Nor was he remiss in his efforts to have his own country in an orderly and settled state, by doing his own duty, and encouraging his Chamberlains in the discharge of theirs. In a letter to his uncle, Robert Grant of Clachaig and Lurg, who was Chamberlain for some time, Sir John Grant writes:
Leathin, this Moonday the 24 of Januarij 1631 zeires.

RICHT LUIFFING WNCKILL, - Forsaimekill as I wnderstand of your great caire and diligence in holding off courts and purging the countrey off knawerie and pyckerie, I doubt nocht but ye haue found many guiltie and worthye of punishment. As for such as ye haue tacken cawrione, hauc a speciall caire that they be presented, and that justice mey strick vpon them [226] without fead or fawour of any man. I ame werie glaid to heare of yowr willingnes and forwardnes heirin, that ye are so weill sett and affected for mainteining of justice, punishing of vice, and reforming of ewill manners, and wishes yow most earnestly to goe on in that good course, that our countrey be not any longer ewill spocken off by any of our neighboures.

Sua thancking yow for yowr great paines, and heartily wishing yow to continow and persevere in doing off justice equally to all, I rest and shall remaine,
Yovr luiffing cusine at pover,
S. J. GRANT.

I hear ther is great shooting with gunns in my woods, therfore sie that they be as weill fyned, and in as great measure as I did myself before, and bind them vp wnder such a penaltie in tyme cumming. Original Letter at Castle Grant.

The most turbulent spirit of Strathspey at this time was James Grant of Carron, or James an Tuim (of the hill), as he was more generally termed, who has come down in tradition as "the Strathspey freebooter." The Grants of Carron were cadets of the Grants of Glenmoriston, through whom they were directly descended from John Grant, second Laird of Freuchie, but by an illegitimate connection. So early as 1559, John Roy Grant, the first of the Grants of Carron, was implicated in the death of John Grant of Ballindalloch, whose descendants, notwithstanding great efforts to repress it, maintained a bitter feud, which displayed itself on every possible occasion. According to one historian of the period, James Grant, at a fair in Elgin about this time, saw his brother Thomas pursued by one of the Grants of Ballindalloch, and lying wounded in the street. He attacked the assailant of his brother and killed him, for which he is said to have been summoned by Ballindalloch, and on non-compearance outlawed. Sir Robert Gordon's History of the Earldom of Sutherland, p. 414. There is, however, preserved among the Grant family muniments, a Commission by King James the Sixth to the Earl of Murray, John Grant of Freuchie, and his son Sir John Grant, in 1619, which refers to and fills up the details of the episode mentioned by Sir Robert Gordon. It relates that on the last day of January 1618, James Grant in Daltalies, and Robert Futhie in Innerowrie, were outlawed at the instance of Thomas Grant of Cardells, and John Grant, apparent of Cardells, as father and brother, and the remanent kin
[227] and friends, for the slaughter of Patrick Grant in Lettoch, and for invading and pursuing Thomas Grant, his wife and son, to the danger of their lives; and the Commissioners were instructed to apprehend the rebels. Original Commission, dated 4th August 1619, at Castle Grant. But no arrest was made; and in 1629, in a complaint made by Patrick Grant of Ballindalloch against Sir John Grant for not producing James Grant as his man, he says, that since his outlawry, "to the forder contempt of justice, he hes associat vnto himselfe a nomber of brokin Hieland men of the Clanrannald, Clangregour, and some others out of Strathspey and Strathdoun, and with thir lawlesse lymmars, armed with vnlawfull weapons he goes athort the cuntrie committing opiu stouthes, heirships, sorning, and depredations." Ballindalloch also adds, that James Grant "wes the cheefe instrument of the troubles fallin out betuix the hous of Carroun and the compleaner, and of the slaughters vnhappilie committed hinc inde." Extract Decreet by Lords of Council, dated 29th January 1629, ibid.

The immediate cause of the complaint by the Laird of Ballindalloch was a raid by James Grant and his followers in November 1628 upon his lands of Inverernan, and the despoiling his tenants there of horses, kine, and sheep. But instead of directing the complaint against the perpetrator of the crime, he charged Sir John Grant before the Lords of Council with being a cognisant resetter of James Grant, or at least that the latter was a tenant and servant of Sir John's, and quite within his power to apprehend and deliver up to justice. In the particular instance he averred that James Grant had spent forty-eight hours upon the Laird's lands, gathering his forces for the raid, and that the Laird had been informed of the fact by two parties, but did not interfere. In connection with the complaint Sir John had to proceed to Edinburgh, but it was dismissed, and Sir John absolved, because, on the matter alleged being referred to the defender's oath, he deponed "that the same wes not of veritie." Ibid.

In narrating the circumstances respecting the career of James an Tuim, Sir Robert Gordon reflects severely upon the obstinacy with which the Laird of Ballindalloch refused all overtures for satisfaction short of the death of James Grant himself. It was the same in the former case of 1558 when John Grant of Ballindalloch was slain by John Roy Grant of Carron. [228] The Laird of Freuchie interposed to pacify his two clansmen, and received the advice of William Lord Forbes and his friends towards obtaining a settlement. In the concluding sentence they say, "And forder, quhare the Lard of Grant informis ws that Johne Grant frendis of Ballanedallacht desyris ane bludy mendis, that is the thing we will nocht nor can nocht grant thareto, be resone it is noder godly, honest, nor frendly." Vol. iii. of this work, p. 283. And in this case, though the Laird of Freuchie frequently endeavoured to reconcile them, all was in vain. "Ballendallogh wes obstinat, and wold hearken to no conditions of peace; though banishment of the partie, and satisfaction in goods and money wes offered vnto him, he wold yeild to no reconciliation without James Grant's blood." History of the Earldom of Sutherland, p. 415.

The raid by James Grant upon the lands of Inverernan had been preceded by a much more serious affray between the Lairds of Ballindalloch and Carron, and therefore partook of the nature of a reprisal. One day in August 1628, Sir Robert Gordon gives the date as 11th September 1628, and takes occasion to note a very remarkable coincidence which fell out thereby. He says: "Give me leave heir to remark the providence and seer it jugement of the Almightie God, who now hath mett Carron with the same measure that his forefather, John Roy Grant of Carron, did serve the ancestour of Ballendallogh for vpon the same day of the moneth that John Roy Grant did kill the great-grandfather of Ballendallogh (being the eleventh day of September), the verie same day of this moneth wes Carron slain by this John Grant of Ballendallogh many yeirs therefter. And besides, as that John Roy Grant of Carron wes left-handed, so is this John Grant of Ballendallogh left-handed also: and moreover, it is to be observed, that Ballendallogh, at the killing of this Carron, had vpon him the same coat-of-armour, or maillie-coat, which John Roy of Carroii had vpon him at the slaughter of the great-grandfather of this Ballen dallogh; which maillie-coat Ballendallogh had, a little befor this tyrne, taken from James Grant, in a skirmish that passed betuixt them." - (History of the Earldom of Sutherland, p. 416.) But the judicial documents referring to the case place the event in August 1628. John Grant of Carron, the nephew of James an Tuim, proceeded to the wood of Abernethy, accompanied by several friends, to cut timber. Thither he was followed by the young Laird of Ballindalloch and a number of his friends, who attacked the Laird of Carron and his party. In the struggle John Grant of Carron was slain, and so also were several of Ballindalloch's friends, including Thomas Grant of Dalvey. From this time forward Ballindalloch and James Grant were sworn foes, and by the latter's depredations the former suffered greatly, in these circumstances, Patrick Grant of Ballindalloch persisted in charging Sir John Grant with default in James Grant's being at large; and although at first [229] the Council acquitted the Laird, this prosecution was the commencement of a period of considerable harassment, annoyance, and expense to him. The attention of the Council was directed to the state of matters in Strathspey, and from this time until his death, they gave Sir John Grant no rest in the pursuit of the disturbers of the district. Young Ballindalloch was afterwards charged, at the instance of the widow of John Grant of Carron, with the murder of her husband, Vol. iii. of this work, p. 225. but procured a remission from King Charles the First for himself, his brother Patrick, William Grant of Cardells, and Archibald Giant of Dalvey. Registrum Secret' Sigilli, Lib. ciii. fol. 232, 3lst July 1631

It was probably in connection with this same business that the Laird took journey in the summer of 1631 to London, to have a personal interview with King Charles. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 55. John Grant of Glenmoriston was there at the same time respecting the charges laid against him by the Earl of Murray, King's Lieutenant in the north of Scotland. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 339. Shortly before this Sir John had received a demand to present before the Privy Council another depredator from Strathspey, Alexander Grant in Tulloch, who was charged with the slaughter of Thomas Grant of Dalvey, but who, instead of complying with the summons to compear before the Earl of Murray, fled to Ireland, ibid. p. 225. and was in consequence outlawed. He had returned, however, and in order to assist the Laird of Freuchie in the arrest, a commission was granted, empowering him to pursue Alexander Grant even outside his own boundaries. Ibid. p. 226. Time apprehension was successfully made, and the prisoner conveyed to Edinburgh, and committed to the Tolbooth. By this time James an Tuim had also been taken, and was a close prisoner in the Castle of Edinburgh. His raid on Inverernan had been followed by another on the lands of Pitchaish, the residence of young Ballindalloch, where much destruction was done by the barns, etc., being set on fire, and a similar fate befell Tulchan, part of the possession of the Laird of Ballindalloch elder. The owners complained grievously to the Earl of Murray, who, being disposed at the time to make up his quarrel with the Mackintoshes, promised to obtain pardon for the latter if they succeeded [230] in capturing James an Tuim, dead or alive. The Mackintoshes at once accepted the offer, and succeeded in finding the freebooter, with his illegitimate son George, and ten men, in a house in Strathavon. A desperate encounter ensued, in which four of James an Tuim's men were slain, the rest taken, and himself severely wounded, but his son escaped. Until his wounds were healed, James Grant was warded in Darnaway, and afterwards removed south to the Castle of Edinburgh. Spalding's Memorialls of the Trubles, vol. i. pp. 22, 23.

Thus, when the Laird went to London, it seemed as if the country had been effectually cleared of its worst disturbers, and for a short time this was the case. But though the subordinate rebels taken were speedily disposed of, Alaster or Alexander Grant and James Grant were reserved for special trial, and in the case of the former it was repeatedly postponed. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 338. At length the trial was fixed to take place on 14th June 1632, and for his compearance thereat Sir John Grant was obliged to find security to the extent of five thousand merks. Ibid. p. 228. The trial eventually did not come on till 4th August, when, at the instance of the Laird of Ballindalloch and others, Alaster Grant was charged with the triple crime of participation in the raid of Inverernan, an attack upon Ballindalloch itself in April 1630, when he slew John Dollas, who was with Ballindalloch resisting the invaders, and the slaughter of Thomas Grant of Dalvey and Lachlan Mackintosh in August 1628. Being found guilty on all these counts, he was sentenced to death. But after sentence was pronounced, an Act of Council was produced commanding the execution to be postponed during His Majesty's pleasure. Ibid. p. 443.

As a further instance of the lawlessness of the district, and of the share contributed to it by the Grants of Tulloch, it may here be noted that a few years later, in 1637, the father and two brothers of this Alaster Grant, known among their clansmen by the cognomen "McJockie," were condemned to a similar fate. Their names were John Grant, alias McJockie in Tulloch, elder, Patrick Grant McJockie, his eldest son, and John Grant McJockie, also his son, and the crimes on account of which they were hanged, were harbouring outlaws of the Macgregor clan, assisting [231] them when attempts were made for their capture, and slaying two of the king's officers and others. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 451.

The reason for the postponement of the execution of Alaster Grant, and also of the trial of James an Tuim, appears to have been a desire on the part of the Privy Council to obtain their evidence in the trial then proceeding, respecting the burning of the Tower of Frendraught, when John Gordon, Viscount of Aboyne, John Gordon of Rothiemay, and several of their attendants, lost their lives in the conflagration. It is unnecessary to relate the circumstances of that well- known event here, save only the fact that James Grant's deposition was taken in the case, he having been asked by Meldrum in Reidhill, who was executed for the deed, to give the assistance of himself and his rebel band in a raid upon the Laird of Frendraught. Spalding's Memorialls of the Trubles, vol. i. pp. 382-411.

This delay in the trial of James an Tuim proved disastrous to the peace of Strathspey, as he found means to escape from his prison in the castle of Edinburgh, and returned to his old haunts. It is said that ropes, conveyed to him by his wife in what ostensibly appeared a kit of butter, provided the means whereby lie obtained his liberty. He was met by his son and assisted towards Strathspey, although he is commonly said to have gone to Ireland. ibid. p. 43. A letter from the Privy Council informed Sir John Grant of the fact of the escape, and requested his best services towards his speedy recapture. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 14. For a time, however, James an Tuim seems to have lived quietly, his only exploit mentioned being the shooting of one Patrick Ger, the leader of a party of Macgregors, introduced into the district by Ballindalloch to effect his capture. The death of Ger appears to have been a relief to the people of Strathspey, and James Grant rose in their estimation on account of the deed. It appears that at this time negotiations had been progressing towards a pacification. Thomas Grant, brother to James an Tuim, had obtained a pardon from King Charles the First for his share in the death of Patrick Grant of Lettoch in 1618, Registrum Secreti Sigilli, vol. cv., fol. 325. 29th March 1634. and Ballindalloch had promised to obtain a remission for his foe, James himself; but [232] instead of implementing this promise, Ballindalloch is said to have hired the Macgregors to capture or kill him. With the intention of obliging Ballindalloch to bind himself more strictly for the fulfillment of this engagement, James Grant, in December 1634, entrapped the young Laird of Ballindalloch into an ambuscade, and conveying him to a disused kiln near Elgin, kept him imprisoned for twenty-two days. At the end of that time, with the connivance of one of his guards, with whom he conversed in Latin and arranged his plans, he effected his escape. Spalding's Memorialls of the Trubles, vol. i.pp. 53, 54.

This proceeding had only the effect of embroiling Strathspey in its former lawless condition. Armed with a commission from the Crown, Ballindalloch arrested and procured the death of Thomas Grant, the owner of the kiln in which he had been confined, and the banishment of others who had been accessory to the kidnapping. James an Tuim retaliated with increased violence. In addition to its own outlaws, Strathspey was burdened with a considerable number of outlawed Macgregors, who, on the pretext of seeking James Grant, committed great excesses. Owing also to the breaking out of the Gordons after the affair of Frendraught, with the settlement of which they were not satisfied, their country was in a similar condition of lawlessness, and the Privy Council saw the urgency of taking decided measures for the restoration of order. Sir John Grant and others were summoned to attend a meeting of the Privy Council in January 1635, at Edinburgh, to give information as to the state of matters in the North. Summons, dated 13th November 1634, vol iii. of this work, p. 447 The Laird attended the meeting, and, among other things, suggested that the only efficient remedy for the irregularities in the North would be to grant ample commissions to landed gentlemen to take, punish, and suppress malefactors, and that if every landed gentleman were so authorised, such transgressors could not possibly escape. He offered to procure further information desired of him, if their Lordships would give him time to obtain it accurately; and he added his opinion that, if steps were not taken now to secure peace in time High lands, the present state of affairs would be nothing to what would ensue. Ibid. p. 449. The Laird's advice was acted upon, and when lie returned home he was [233] provided with a commission empowering him to convocate the lieges, and seek and apprehend all thieves and lawless persons, and also "all ydle and maisterlesse men wanting lawfull and sufficient testimonialls of thair birth, residence, and trade of life," not only within his own bounds but anywhere else. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 339

The young Laird of Ballindalloch appeared also at Edinburgh at the time, summoned probably on the same business. He took occasion to present to the Privy Council a petition, containing a heavy indictment against Sir John Grant and the Laird of Glenmoriston for resetting and favouring James an Tuim. In the petition young Ballindalloch gives an account of his being kidnapped, and of the conditions on which his freedom was offered to him. These are printed elsewhere. Ibid. p. 448. The Council agreed to the prayer of the petition, and ordered that the Lairds of Freuchie and Glenmoriston should be "warned to hear the desire of the bill granted." It apparently terminated in an injunction to Sir John Grant to do his utmost to apprehend James Grant. While in Edinburgh, Sir John dealt with the Chancellor, John Spottiswood, Archbishop of St. Andrews, to grant him special powers for this difficult case, as he evidently hoped he might gain over some of the gang to betray the rest. The Chancellor responded by granting him the following warrant, which has also been reproduced in lithograph:

Forasmuch as Sir Jhon Grant of Freuchy hath resaved commissioun from the Lordis of his Majestie's Councille for apprehending the rebell James Grant and his associats, and that it is necessair for expeding the said service, that he be permitted to treat by him self and his servantis or otheris that he thinks fit to employe, with suche of that wnlaws fellowship as can or may be induced to discover the places of the said James Grant his resort: These are to assure the said Sir Jhon Grant that nether he him self, nor any of his employment in the maner foresaid, shall be called in questioun for suche intercommoning; and that I shall not faill to obtain his Majestie's speciall warrand therefore, and as the service succeidis a particular reward and thankis for the same. At Edinburgh, the 9 March 1635.
SANCTANDREWS, Cancellr. Original Warrant at Castle Grant

The Chancellor also encouraged him afterwards by letters, and acknowIedged some services rendered by the Laird. Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 56, 57

[234] On returning home the Laird put in execution the plan he had conceived for the speedy apprehension of the dreaded freebooter and his gang. He made an engagement with four persons, promising them five thousand merks each if they took James Grant, dead or alive, before the 2d of June following. This is evident from a discharge granted to the Laird by James Grant of Auchterblair for "four bandis in the quhich is conteinit fyv thousand merkis in everie baud to be giwin to the four particular persons in the bandis themseiffis contenit, for taking and apprehending the rebell James Grant, dead or liueing, betuix the dait heirof and the second day of Junij nix to cum in this instant zeir of God, Jm vic threttie fyw zeiris." Original Discharge, dated 14th April 1635, at Castle Grant. But neither was this method successful.

By the advice of friends the breach between the Laird and the house of Ballindalloch was healed by an agreement drawn lip at Leith on 9th August 1635, in which they mutually discharged each other of all actions civil and criminal, and renewed their respective obligations of manrent and maintenance with special reference to James an Tuim and his accomplices. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 450. In a letter to the Laird, John Hay, Clerk to the Privy Council, takes credit for the accomplishment of this reconciliation, flattering himself that he had done a good work to the Laird, his house and name, and also to the king, for he adds, "be that dissension yow alwayes lost being chieffe to the whole name." Sir John had previously written to John Hay, and the latter in his reply deals sharply with Sir John for not taking more effective measures against James Grant and the Macgregors, and warns him that unless by some notable act he manifested his sincerity, he would certainly incur the displeasure of the Council. He further expressed his surprise that the Laird had not taken united action with Ballindalloch, and advised that they should consult together as to what should he done for the peace of the country, inform the Council of their resolutions, and at once proceed to action. Original Letter, dated 2d November 1635 at Castle Grant.

These remarks were entirely uncalled for, as the Laird had in reality set to work as soon as he returned home in October. He had then a private meeting with young Ballindalloch, at which they discussed their [235] method of procedure. At the latter's request the Laird sent him twelve men, and these, with two furnished by young Ballindalloch, spent fourteen days in an unsuccessful search through Inveravon, Skirdustan, Rothes, Balveny, Murthlach, Auchindoun, and Glenrinnes, and this was all carried on at the sole expense of the Laird. Afterwards, on its being reported that James an Tuim was lurking in Strathavon, the Laird at once despatched thirty-six men with their followers, who returned with two of the gang, but obtained no tidings of their leader. Thus far he had acted with Ballindalloch and by his counsel, but seeing the fruitlessness of these efforts, he made liberal offers of money, lands, and other things to persons living in the neighbourhoods haunted by the rebels if they would produce them, dead or alive. The Laird, however, appears to have been frequently betrayed by his own men, as in a deposition made before the Council it was declared that there were never ten men employed in service against James Grant but five of them sent him information privately of what was going on. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 61.

Seeing that the Council were intent on pushing him hardly, Sir John procured certificates from the ministers of Cromdale, Duthil, Abernethy, and Inveravon, of his endeavours to carry out the desires of the Council, and sent them to Edinburgh for their information. Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 229, 341 They were presented by George Earl of Seaforth, who in a letter told the Laird that it might be necessary for him to come to Edinburgh to avoid "intended prejudice" by justifying his diligence. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 58. And Lord Seaforth added, "On thing I will recommend to yow, as on quho affects and loues, if by any meins ye can apprehend James Grant, proue not neglectiue, otheruys greatter hurt will insheue then ye apprehend."

The determined efforts made to effect his capture appear to have rendered James an Tuim more reckless, and, as if to mock his pursuers, he perpetrated a more atrocious deed than any of which he had hitherto been guilty. There are various versions of the story, but in a summons raised against Thomas Grant, Tutor of Carron, for inter communing with his brother, it is said that while entertained in the [236] Tutor's dwelling-house, he got information that Thomas Grant of Culquoich and his brother were coining into the fields for some business, whereupon he set an ambush for them, took them captive, and after keeping them for a short time, barbarously murdered them and cut off their heads. Original Summons, dated 14th April 1636, at Castle Grant. Amid repeated attempts to effect his capture, James Grant succeeded in prolonging his existence until 1639, when he obtained a remission from King Charles (Spalding, vol. i. p. 141), apparently through the good offices of George Marquis of Huntly, who thereafter employed him to bunt out and bring to justice those very Macgregors introduced into the country to compass his own death (Vol. iii. of this work, p. 231). This change was very agreeable to the Laird and other prominent members of the family, but it involved them in high risk, as their cautionry was secured in considerable sums. in connection with this, two letters are given (Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 69, 70). James Grant also assisted the Marquis of Huntly against the Covenanters, but appears to have plundered friend and foe indiscriminately (Spalding, vol. ii. pp. 338, 341). It has not been ascertained when he died. His illegitimate son, George Grant, was executed at Edinburgh, in June 1636. Letters received from correspondents in Edinburgh, informed Sir John how seriously this outrage had been taken to heart by the King and Council, and one and all urged him to come to town and clear himself. The Laird's health, however, was failing, and although on that account the time appointed was occasionally prorogued, his advisers repeatedly counselled him to undertake the journey, and not irritate the Council. Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 58-63. "I am sorie," wrote David Murray, a merchant in Edinburgh, to Lady Lilias Murray, "that the Laird is so ower charged as he is, and that the Councill is so possessed with the Lardes abeletie that he is able to tak James Grantt quhen he pleases, and will not belleiff ane that sayes in the contrair; and I haive done quhat I canne to speak the treuthe as I know it, in his favors, but still they contenew that confident.. Bot their ar none of thaim malilciouslie sett against him, bot I hoipe that God will move their mynds to be his freends, God send him relleiff that he may haive that he desyres - to leive at hoome in peace and quyetnes." Original Letter, dated 19th July 1636, at Castle Grant.

It does not appear that Sir John went to Edinburgh during 1636, but, meanwhile, his troubles with the Council increased. At this very time he was charged with permitting another noted freebooter, Gilderoy, and a number of his Macgregor band to be harboured within his bounds, Vol. ii. of this work, p. 63 and it was in connection with this, and in the close of this year, that the Laird's tenants or wadsetters in Tulloch were afterwards tried and condemned to [237] death. He had, indeed, presented several of the rebels to justice, the expense of maintaining some of whom for months in the Tolbooth at Edinburgh was thrown upon him, and another was produced in October, which the Laird's law-agent in Edinburgh adverting to, said it would have been better had the Laird personally presented' the rebel, and received his own thanks therefor. But he urged the Laird to come up to Edinburgh, as his presence was necessary for his affairs. Original Letter, James Gibson to Sir John Grant, dated 28th October 1636, at Castle Grant. The Laird, however, spent the winter at home, and probably on some urgent requisition from the Council only proceeded to Edinburgh about March 1637. On his arrival, or shortly afterwards, he was placed in ward on the charge of not pursuing the Clan Gregor, but, apparently on account of the state of his health, was set at liberty. Spalding's Memorialls of the Trubles, vol. i. p. 76. He made his last will and testament on 31st March 1637, in which he mentions several of the principal debts owing by him, and in consideration of his sickness appoints Mary Ogilvie, his wife, and his eldest son James, his executors, to make up an inventory of his debts and pay them. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 230. The deed indicates that Sir John was in a weak state of health, and his signature is affixed in a tremulous hand, very different from his usually bold and dashing signature. About the same time Sir John also revoked all grants made by him at any time to his wife, whereto he was not obliged by the terms of their contract of marriage. To this course he was apparently advised by his legal agents in Edinburgh for the good of the estate, as the document was drawn up there, and contains their names as witnesses. He was empowered so to act by a law referred to in the deed, but it was probably done with reluctance. Sir John Grant died on the day after making his testament, the 1st of April 1637, and was buried in the Abbey chapel at Holyrood.

As already stated, Sir John Grant of Freuchie married Mary, daughter of Sir Walter Ogilvie of Findlater, knight, afterwards Lord Ogilvie of Deskford. She survived her husband, and was still alive in 1646, but appears to have died shortly thereafter. She resigned her right of co-executry in her husband's estate in favour of her eldest son, and at a later period wished to sequestrate part of her marriage portion to provide for her [238] younger children. This was objected to by her eldest son, but a reconciliation was effected by the interposition of George Earl of Seaforth. Several letters written by Mary Ogilvie to her son during the wars of Montrose are still preserved. By this lady Sir John left seven sons and three daughters.
1. James, who succeeded his father as seventh Laird of Freuchie.
2. Patrick, called of Cluniemoir and of Cluniebeg, but better known as Tutor of Grant, which he became on the death of his brother James in 1663. He held a commission in the army for some time as Lieutenant-Colonel. He married Sibilla, daughter of Kenneth Mackenzie of Kintail, already successively the relict of .John Macleod of Harris and Alexander Fraser, Tutor of Lovat. Patrick Grant had issue three daughters, one of whom, named Mary, married Patrick Grant, or Macalpine, of Rothiemurchus. From this marriage is descended the present Sir John Peter Grant of Rothiemurchus. Patrick Grant had also a natural son Robert.
3. Alexander, who carried on a litigation with his eldest brother about the distribution of their father's effects. He is said to have married Isabel, daughter of Nairn of Morenge, by whom he left issue two daughters. Shaw's Moray, vol. i. p. 102. He was alive in 1665.
4. Major George Grant. In 1675 he received a commission to sup press robberies in the Highlands, in connection with which he is mentioned as having arbitrarily comprised a large amount of farm stock on Borlum-more, in Urquhart, without the authority of his brother Thomas, who was then Bailie of Urquhart. He is said to have been for some time Governor of Durnbarton Castle. He died s.p.
5. Robert, who is said to have married a daughter of Dunbar of Berinagefield, by whom he had a son, who was father of Robert Ogg of Milton of Muckrach. Ibid He died before 22d August 1653. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 343.
6. Mungo, called of Kinchirdie, but sometimes also of Duthil and of Gellovie. He was for some time chamberlain and factor to his nephew, Ludovick Grant of Freuchie. He was twice married, first to Margaret Gordon, and secondly to Elizabeth, daughter of John Grant of Gartenmore, by both of whom he had issue, [239] and was the ancestor of the Grants of Kinchirdie, Gellovie, Knockando, and the later Grants of Gartenbeg. Of his descendants a pedigree is given in this work.
7. Thomas, called of Balmacaan, who was born in 1637, and was for some time Chamberlain of Urquhart to his nephew Ludovick. He is said to have married, in 1682, Mary, daughter of Colin Campbell of Clunes, by whom he had two sons, Ludovick of Achnastank and Patrick of Culvullin, and a daughter, who married Mungo Grant of Mullochard. Shaw's Moray, vol. i, p.102 In 1683 he is stated to have been forty-six years of age.
The daughters were :-
1. Mary, who married, first, Lord Lewis Gordon, afterwards third Marquis of Huntly, and had issue, George, created first Duke of Gordon, and several daughters; and secondly, James Ogilvie, second Earl of Airlie, as his second wife, without issue.
2. Anne, who married, as his second wife, Kenneth Mackenzie of Gairloch. Their contract of marriage is dated 17th October 1640. She had issue.
3. Lilias. She married John Byres of Coittis, who was afterwards knighted. Their post-nuptial contract of marriage is dated at Cupar, Fife, 26th May 1666.

Volume 1 Chapter 13