"The Chiefs of Grant" (1883) by Sir William Fraser
Volume I, Chapter 15

LUDOVICK GRANT, EIGHTH OF FREUCHIE AND OF GRANT. JANET BRODIE, HIS FIRST WIFE. JEAN HOUSTOUN, HIS SECOND WIFE. 1663-1716.

[291] LUDOVICK GRANT was a minor at the date of his father's death, and as Lady Mary Stewart, his mother, died in 1662, the care of his education and estate devolved upon the curators nominated by the deceased Laird. These included among them, as narrated in the preceding memoir, men of the highest rank in the kingdom, the Earl of Rothes, High Treasurer of Scotland, and James Sharp, Archbishop of St. Andrews, being two of the principal. The chief burden of administration of the young Laird's estates fell upon his uncle, Patrick Grant, who held a Lieutenant-Colonel's commission in the army, but who devoted himself to paying off the burdens on his nephew's patrimony, and otherwise acted the part of a careful guardian. He was known as the Tutor of Grant. Ludovick Grant and his brother Patrick were first sent to school at Elgin. The two boys were accompanied to Elgin by the Tutor, and two days were occupied in the journey, the intervening night being spent at Forres. In an account by the Tutor, beginning in 1663, and continuing for several years, there are frequent entries referring to this period of their education. They are such as the following:

"Item, payit to George Cuming, provest of Elgin, for the Laird, his brother Patrick and their attenders, during the tyme they wer in Elgin, conforme to his discharge there vpoun, £270.
"Item, payit at the Laird's away cuming from Elgin, to the schoolmaister, and wther thingis belonging to the Laird and his brother, £33, 3s. 4d."

Other entries are of interest as indicating the expense of a young lady's education :- "Item, payit for Margaret, the Laird's daughter, hir intertainment in meat, cloathe, and learneing," from Martinmas 1663 to Whitsunday 1665, £360. Original Account at Castle Grant.

[292] From Elgin the Laird and his brother went to the University of St. Andrews. There they were under the supervision of one of their curators, James Sharp, the Archbishop, and by choosing St. Andrews as the place of Ludovick Grant's education he would also be near the Earl of Rothes, to whom the deceased Laird of Freuchie had specially commended his sons "to be educat and broght up with his Lordship, and as he shall please to dispose." Latter Will, vol. iii. of this work, p. 352. From the Tutor of Grant's accounts it would appear that he and his nephews started on their journey southward on 20th July 1664, and travelled to St. Andrews by Dundee, sending a messenger in advance to inform the Primate and the Earl of Rothes of their coming. They reached St. Andrews some time before the 12th of August, stopping at Dundee to receive the latest touch of fashion before presenting themselves at the University, as among other references to dress, there was a sum of 12s. (Scots) paid for "cutting and puldering their hair in Dundee."

It may be that after making arrangements for their stay in St. Andrews the Laird and his brother accompanied their uncle to Edinburgh. But this is not certain, though he passed to that place, thence back to St. Andrews, and then returned home, reaching Castle Grant on 29th August 1664. The Laird and his brother were lodged in the house of one "Widow Englishe" in St. Andrews. Their board and other expenses were paid in advance to her, £156 quarterly; for "chalmer mail (rent) for same time, £4; for bedding the said tyme, £8; item, to the ladinster (laundress?) the said tyme, £5, 1 0s.; item, to the Regent of Humanitie (Latin) the said. tyme, £50; item, to the janitor the same tyme, £3." Also there was left with "ther pedagoge (or 'governour') to buy fyr and candle" for the same period, the sum of £16, and the sum of £12 was given to the boys themselves, for "the poor on the Sabbathe day, and to buy wther litle necessars." Similar payments were made each quarter until 12th May 1666, the only apparent break in the residence of the young Laird at St. Andrews being a visit of a fortnight's duration to Edinburgh in February 1666, for the purpose of choosing curators. Tutor's Accounts at Castle Grant. One entry having reference to the young Laird's dress, of date 29th June 1666, may be of interest. "Item, given for three elnes half elne of tartane to be the Lard and his man trewes, 2 lib. 6s. 8d."

[293] How long Ludovick Grant remained at St. Andrews is not clearly ascertainable, but he was still there on 25th February 1667, when he writes to his uncle in expectation of a visit from him and Archbishop Sharp. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 89. In the autumn of 1666 the Laird had been at Elgin on 15th September to "choose his curators," from which it appears that several of his curators resided in Edinburgh, and others in Morayshire. At the same time the young Laird paid several visits, among others to the Marquis of Huntly, and the Laird of Boyne, who, in 1661, had married Anna Grant, the Laird's eldest sister. An earlier visit to Elgin on the 29th August, under the guardianship of his "regents," is also recorded, while the younger brother, Patrick, was "left at the school!." Ludovick returned to St. Andrews in October, and, as stated, was still there in the following February. On his journey south, the young Laird was preceded by eight cows, which, at his desire, were sent to St. Andrews, but whether as presents, or for the table of the University, does not appear. In or about July 1667, a payment of £133, 6s. 8d. was made to Mr. Allan Grant, Regent at St. Andrews, for fees due, and this is the last recorded payment for education on the Laird's behalf. He was in Edinburgh in that month, and wrote from the city on the 18th, begging the Tutor to send him more money. Original Letter at Castle Grant. In reply he received 200 merks, which Ludovick acknowledged by writing that he wondered his uncle had not sent him more, adding, "I cannot goe out of the town till I get mor." As upwards of 400 merks had been sent only the month previous, it would seem as if Ludovick had been set free from College, and was now amusing himself in the capital. The Tutor's accounts show that up to November 1667, several considerable sums were sent "south" to the Laird, but his place of residence is not named. Tutor's Account at Castle Grant.

A gift of Ludovick Grant's ward and marriage had, very shortly after his father's death, been bestowed on William Scott of Ardross, Original Gift, of date 9th October 1663, ibid. but on 23d May 1665, the young Laird was retoured heir to his father in all his lands of Freuchie, Glencarnie, Mulben, Urquhart, and others, in terms of a royal precept, of date 8th December 1664, in which he is declared to be of lawful [294] age by virtue of the King's dispensation. Precept and Retours at Castle Grant. Ludovick, however, as stated, remained in the south until the end of 1667, or beginning of 1668, and did not immediately enter upon the duties of his position. In 1666, Lieutenant-Colonel Patrick Grant gave up an account of charge and discharge of his intromissions with the estates of Grant, which was examined and reported on at the desire of Archbishop Sharp and the Earl of Rothes. Probably on the faith of the report, a discharge in favour of the Tutor was signed by the Laird and three of his curators, in which the Tutor was exonered of the sum of £43,730 Scots paid by him in liquidation of debts, etc. Extract discharge, signed 1667, and recorded in the Books of Council and Session, 12th February 1668, at Castle Grant, This discharge, however, seems to have been limited to the debts paid in terms of the vouchers, and the Tutor's general management of the estate appears to have been unsatisfactory. This is shown by a letter addressed by the Earl of Rothes and Archbishop Sharp to the Earl of Murray and other curators in the north, referring to reports as to the neglect and disorder of the Laird's affairs, and urging that steps be taken to rectify such abuses. The complaints may have come from Ludovick Grant himself, who was at this time in Strathspey, An entry in the Tutor's accounts of a sum of £53, 7s. expended for necessaries to the Laird's house in April 1668, seems to indicate that he then had taken up formal residence at Castle Grant. and who from certain indications in his letters, had, although a youth, a sharp eye for his own affairs. The letter suggests that the curators in the north should meet with the Laird, inspect the Tutor's accounts, take an effectual course for uplifting rents, and appoint fit persons to intromit with the estate and levy the rents. The curators are also directed to attend to the woods, to prevent their further destruction, and otherwise to provide for the better condition of their ward, by securing a proper sum for his aliment and education, Letter, 25th April 1668, vol. ii. of this work p. 22. and to report their proceedings before the middle of June. Acting on these instructions, the curators, at a meeting at Darnaway on 28th October 1668, appointed two commissioners (*) Original Commission at Castle Grant. for receiving the rents of the estates, and it is worthy of notice that Ludovick Grant himself was one, the other being John Grant of Auchroisk, who had acted as factor [295] under the Laird's father. That the Laird himself was thus empowered by his curators to intromit with his own estate implies considerable confidence in his general shrewdness and business capacity.

From this time, receipts and discharges were granted by the Laird himself, who gradually assumed the full management of his estate. He afterwards made a formal challenge of Lieutenant-Colonel Patrick Grant's tutory, and raised an action of count and reckoning, setting aside the discharge already referred to, on the ground of minority, and that it was not signed by a quorum of curators. The accounting between the Laird and his uncle was afterwards submitted to arbitration, and it was found, upon examination of a formal account of charge and discharge drawn by the Tutor in 1682, that the balance due by him was £7305, 10s. 9d. Original Account and Memorandum of Award, 12th September 1684, at Castle Grant. Following upon this award, matters were settled in an amicable manner, and two months later, mutual discharges were executed both by the Laird and the Tutor on the same day at Ballachastell. Discharges dated 7th November 1684, ibid.

There is little to relate regarding Ludovick Grant during the next few years, or previous to his marriage. He probably employed himself in settling his estate. Like other Highland landlords, he was much troubled with the depredations of loose plunderers and broken men, as they were called, who, roaming from district to district, pilfered everything on which they could lay their hands. These were distinct from the Cearnachs, who may be described as a higher class of freebooters, who made occasional raids in the way of cattle-lifting. Their profession was considered so honourable, that they were frequently joined by sons of the "tacksmen, or second order of gentry," who considered their exploits as good training for the life of a soldier. Stewart's Sketches of the Highlanders, vol. i. p. 39 Ludovick Grant's treatment of one of these gentlemen freebooters will be afterwards related.

The depredations committed during the Laird's minority were of a petty description. It was customary for the Lairds of Freuchie to receive commissions to act as sheriffs or justiciars within their own bounds, and such a commission or Act of Council in favour of the Laird had been obtained shortly after his father's death. This appears from a letter to the Tutor of [296] Grant dated 29th April 1665, in which the writer expresses a hope that the Act will be carried out against "suspect persones or robbers," with special reference to goods taken from him and his tenants, and he promises that faithfulness on this head will be duly reported to the Privy Council. Original Letter at Castle Grant. It is dated from Mortlich, and signed, "J. Lyone."

In pursuance, no doubt, of this or a similar commission, the Tutor of Grant had, in 1667, seized three members of the sept of the Macmartins, and incarcerated them in Ballachastell. The Macmartins were also known as Camerons of Letter Finlay, and the head of their branch of the Camerons was foster-father to the famous Sir Ewen Cameron of Lochiel. Memoirs of Lochiel, p. 6 But from the locality of their lands, and constant intermarriages with the Macdonalds of Keppoch, they were under the jurisdiction of the chief of Glengarry, then Angus or Aeneas Lord Macdonell. Hence the letter addressed by his Lordship to Lieutenant-Colonel Grant on behalf of the captive Macmartins. Letter, 29th June 1667, vol. ii. of this work, p. 89 Lord Macdonell admits that the prisoners may have justly deserved their confinement, but that he had received information of extenuating circumstances, and he therefore begs that the men may be liberated on security, promising to contribute to their correction. The Tutor of Grant gave effect to Lord Macdonell's request, and on 19th July 1667, two of the clan Macmartin, at Ballachastell, entered into a bond on behalf of their clansmen, that the latter would be forthcoming when required by justice, on a month's warning. They also came under obligation to make good whatever loss the Laird of Grant had suffered from the men in custody. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 245 What the offence was is not stated, but it would appear to have been some petty depredation.

The Laird, on 26th December 1671, Diaries of the Laird of Brodie, p. 323 married Janet Brodie, only daughter and heiress of Alexander Brodie of Lethen. A letter from the young lover to his future bride is printed in the second volume of this work, Vol. ii. of this work, p. 90. and is also reproduced in lithograph. This union brought the Laird into intimate relations with the family of Brodie, one of whom acted as his legal adviser, along with James Grant, advocate, afterwards Sir James Grant of Dalvey. From the correspondence of these two gentlemen it [297] would appear that for some years after reaching his majority, which was probably about the date of his marriage, the Laird was engaged in a long and troublesome litigation as to the teinds of his lands. The merits of the affair cannot now be clearly understood, but the Laird's chief opponents at first were the Marquis of Huntly, and Lachlan Mackintosh of Torcastle. The Marquis opposed the Laird's claims, but the process against Mackintosh seems to have dropped.

This last result was probably owing to a remonstrance addressed by Mackintosh not to the Laird himself, but to his father-in-law, Mr. Brodie of Lethen, in the following terms: "Your son-in-law, the Laird of Grant, hes delt a litle unfreindly and vnnighbourlie with me in entering in law against me, and puting me to unseasonable spending, till first he tryed whither I hade any lawful defences," etc. Mackintosh sends documents to prove his case, in the hope that the Laird of Freuchie may be persuaded to abandon his process. Original Letter, 18th December 1675, at Castle Grant. Mr. Brodie sent this letter to his son-in-law, with an intimation that he had seen a bond by Sir John Grant, Ludovick's grandfather, to the grandfather of Mackintosh, binding himself to dispone to the latter the teinds of his lands in Badenoch, also a decreet-arbitral in which Sir John discharged all claims on Mackintosh. Mr. Brodie therefore advised the Laird to desist from further proceedings, and this advice seems to have been taken.

On the other hand, the dispute with Huntly continued for some time. It seems to have related to the lands of Curr, Clurie, Kincardine and others, but was complicated by the fact that more than one person was concerned. It would appear, however, that as regards the Marquis him self, matters tended, in the year 1678, to a compromise. On the 24th January of that year he wrote to the Laird in reply to a communication as to Kincardine, by which he is hopeful that the affair may be "putt to a close," adding, "Iff yow do me any pleasure in this I will not be unmyndfull of it, and as I have allwayes distinguished my freinds from those that are not, so I still intend to continew after that manner." Original Letter, ibid.

Besides the processes against Huntly and Mackintosh, the Laird of Grant had a number of minor litigations on his hands, as to [298] non-payment of feu-duties, spuilzies of teinds, etc., which, though troublesome to him, have no interest for this history. He had also some difficulty with the proprietors of Pluscardine, apparently as to the titles of that property, which was purchased by him in 1677, his father-in-law, how ever, paying the purchase-money, the estate being provided to the Laird's second son, and it was afterwards possessed by his second surviving son, James. Shaw's Moray, p. 301. The Laird at this time also became obnoxious to the Government, as a charge was made against him that he was the instigator of a "ryot" or quarrel between Mr. Alexander Grant of Kirdells and Dunbar of Newton, Original Letter from law-agents, 11th December 1677, at Castle Grant. so that his affairs between 1671 and 1678 must have been a source of considerable vexation.

It was probably, therefore, somewhat of a relief that in the latter year, the Laird was called upon to give proof of his loyalty by contributing men to the public service. He had previously received from the Marquis of Huntly, on 22d December 1677, a request to have his men in readiness on twenty-four hours' notice to march to Stirling or elsewhere, Vol. ii. of this work, p. 23 which, four days later, seems to have been partly countermanded. An order from the Privy Council informed the Laird that it had been resolved, for the suppression of conventicles and "other insolencies," to call out the Highlanders, under the command of the Marquis of Athole and the Earls of Mar, Murray, Perth, and Caithness, and he was required to take an effectual course to secure the peace of the Highlands under his command, and also within the bounds of those employed upon the special service referred to, that no violence or injury should be done to their country, or any thefts of their goods by those under the Laird's jurisdiction. Ibid. p. 24. The expedition on which the Highlanders were to be employed was that known to history as the "Highland Host." The muster of the clans did not, however, take place until 1678, when, on 24th June, about 8000 men assembled at Stirling, whence they over-ran the western shires of the Lowlands, effectually overawing the Covenanters of that district. No man, however, lost his life at their hands, and after remaining about eight months in the south, the Highlanders were [299] disbanded, and returned northward laden with spoil. A quaint writer says, "When they passed Stirling bridge every man drew his sword to show the world they hade returned conquerors from their enemies land; but they might as well have showen the pots, pans, girdles, shoes taken off country men's feet, and other bodily and household furniture with which they were burdened," etc. Kirkton's History, by Sharpe, p. 390. A "girdle" is a flat circular iron plate used for baking oat cakes, etc., over the fire.

From such an inglorious campaign Ludovick Grant and his men were exempted, the duty assigned to them being that of guarding the peace of the country, but towards the end of 1678 he was, it is said, ordered to send men to Inverlochy. The authority for this statement Diaries of the Lairds of Brodie, p. 405. Under date 2d November 1678, the diarist writes, "L. Grant cam heir and told me he was cald to send men to Inverlochie. I desir'd that he might ordour his men to doe no harm, and to caus tell his freinds that he sent them in obedienc to the Counsel, but without ani intention of hurt to them." does not indicate the purpose in view, but seems to imply that the Grants were to be used to interfere in the dispute betwixt Lord Macdonell and the Earl of Argyll. This, however, is doubtful, for though the purpose for which the Laird was to send men to Inverlochy is not clearly known, it is certain that he himself was summoned south at that period, under a special proclamation directed to landlords and chiefs of clans. The state of the Highlands, always a trouble, was then specially engaging attention, and it was ordained that chiefs of clans and others should compear before the Privy Council upon the last Thursday of February 1679, and yearly thereafter upon the second Thursday of July. They were to give security for their clans, and receive instructions as to preserving the peace. In this proclamation, which is dated on 10th October 1678, Proclamation in "Antiquarian Notes" by Mr. Charles Fraser Mackintosh, pp. 183 184. the "Laird of Grant" is specially mentioned, along with a number of the principal barons and heads of clans in the Highlands. Another clause of the proclamation directs that certain persons named, heads of branches of clans, who, "by reason of their mean condition, are not able to come into Edinburgh and find caution," should come to Inverlochy before the 20th November following (1678), and at that place give proper security for good behaviour. "Antiquarian Notes," pp. 185. 188. Several Grants, as Balmacaan, Rothiemurchus, [300] Glenmoriston, Corriemony, Auchernach, Tullochgorm, Gartinbeg, and others, are included under this clause, and as the dates correspond, the entry in the Laird of Brodie's diary may refer to these, as their chief might be responsible for their appearance at Inverlochy.

So much oppression had prevailed during the stay of the "Highland Host" in the western counties that immediately on its departure the Covenanters rose in insurrection. A contributory circumstance was the defeat of Graham of Claverhouse and the Royalist troops under his command, by a body of armed Covenanters at Drumclog. The victory thus gained raised the spirits of the people of the west to such a height, that they gathered in large numbers and marched restlessly through the country. History of Scotland, by John Hill Burton, vol. vii. p. 226. The defeat of the Government troops, and the exaggerated reports as to time numbers concerned in the rising, greatly alarmed those in authority, and the Privy Council sent for levies to all parts of the kingdom. Ludovick Grant's neighbour, Lachlan Mackintosh of Torcastle, is known to have been summoned, The Mackintoshes and Clan Chattan, p. 391. and the Laird himself appears also to have received the Council's orders and to have responded to them. The decisive conflict of Bothwell Bridge on 22d June 1679, probably rendered active service on the part of the Grants unnecessary, but at a later period the Laird claimed consideration from the Government of King James the Seventh for zeal and forwardness in aiding to suppress the rebellion of 1679. Draft Petition in 1685, at Castle Grant.

In the following year the Duke of York came to Scotland on a visit as Lord High Commissioner. He brought with him his wife, Mary of Este, and his daughter the Princess Anne. His administration at a later date was distinguished for its severity, but at this period, according to contemporary testimony, he conducted himself in such a way as contrasted favourably with the intolerance of Lauderdale's ministry, and gained for him the regard of many. That the Duke desired to ingratiate himself with all classes is implied in a letter written by James Grant of Dalvey, advocate, to the Laird of Freuchie, urging the latter to come south and appear at the Court of His Royal Highness. The first sentence of the letter may refer to legal affairs, but the Laird's clansman is evidently anxious that his chief should [301] make a good appearance. The writer says, "I have consulted with all your friends anent your coming south : It is resolved your best conduct in generall, and its the opinion of all your friends, that yow come south again the day peremptorly, since your absence may be misconstructed, and His Royal Highness (be all appeirance) hes a designe to be acquainted with all the chiefs of clannes, and its thought a solecisme in any gentleman of qualitie to neglect the kissing of his hands." Original Letter, dated 26th January 1680, at Castle Grant. Whether the Laird went to Edinburgh at this time cannot be clearly ascertained, though it is not improbable. He certainly travelled south in the following year, when the Duke of York was a second time in Scotland, and he was a member of the Parliament opened by the Duke on 28th July 1681. On that occasion the Laird of Freuchie and Thomas Dunbar of Grange appeared as commissioners for the shire of Elgin. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. viii. p.232. In this important Parliament were discussed the Acts anent the succession to the Crown and "Religion and the Test." The Parliament generally seems to have offered no objection to the passing of these Acts, nor to the imposing of the test upon all classes of men holding offices, either public or private, although the form of oath which bore that the "King's Majesty is the only supream Governour of this realme over all persons and in all causes as weill ecclesiasticall as civil," had a highly important significance, when interpreted by the Act of Succession, which secured the Crown to a Roman Catholic.

The Laird of Freuchie apparently voted in unison with his fellow Members of Parliament on all points of the Test Act, save one, in regard to which the official record, of the date 31st August 1681, runs thus: "That pairt of the Act, If the Test should be put to the electors of commissioners for shires to the Parliament, having been put to the vote by it selfe before the voteing and passing of the whole Act, and the same being caryed in the affirmative, the Laird of Saltoun and the Laird of Grant having voted in the negative, desired their dissent might be marked." Ibid. p. 245.

This incident, in which the Laird of Freuchie was associated with Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun, afterwards so famous as a leader of the National party in Scotland, has been embellished by the hand of tradition.

[302] It is related that "Laird Lewis was so dissatisfied with the measures of Court, particularly that the King should endeavour by sinister means to attain to absolute and arbitrary power, and for having openly countenanced Popery, notwithstanding of his oath to the contrary, that he did in a particular manner testify his dissatisfaction by openly opposing the Test Act in face of Parliament. The Duke of York, the then Commissioner for the Crown, hearing this, stood up and said, 'Let his Highland Majesty's protest be marked.'" Another version of this story repeats the assertion of this Laird's dislike to Popery, and also relates the incident of the protest, and that he insisted on its being recorded, when the Duke of York from the throne replied, "His Highland Majesty need not be afraid, the protest shall be marked." But in this case the date of the event is said to be 1685, when, though there was a Parliament, the Laird was not a member, and the Duke of York had become King. There is certainly nothing improbable in the detail given by tradition, and the Laird of Brodie writes in his diary that he heard that "Grant was in favour of D. Y." (Duke of York). Diaries of the Lairds of Brodie, p. 458, under date 28th July 1681. But the official record is as narrated in the preceding paragraph, and so far from implying that the Laird of Freuchie was in general opposition, it shows that his dissent to the Test Act was on one point alone. His reasons for his negative vote are not apparent; they may have been merely technical, or may have had a wider and deeper foundation. But as to this no further evidence has been obtained.

The traditional account of the foregoing incident further relates that the Duke of York represented the Laird's behaviour to the King, and that the bad effects thereof were soon apparent in the measures taken against the Laird and his lady to punish them for nonconformity. But there is no reason to connect the two things, as the Laird's protest was recorded in 1681, and the commission against nonconformists in the north was not appointed until 30th December 1684. There can be no doubt, however, that the Laird then suffered from the severe character of the Acts against conventicles, and other oppressive measures. On the date above referred to, the Earls of Errol and Kintore, and Sir George Monro of Culrain, were [303] appointed by the Privy Council as a commission "to prosecute all persons guilty of church disorders, and other crimes, in all the bounds betwixt Spey arid Ness, including Strathspey and Abernethie, and their first meeting to be at Elgin the 22d of January following." The commissioners are reported by Wodrow to have "caused erect a new gallows ad terrorem," as soon as they came to Elgin. Most of the Presbyterians in the district were summoned before the Commission, "tho' they had no crimes to charge them with but absence from the kirk and being at conventicles; none here having been at Bothwel, or in any thing termed rebellion." Diaries of the Lairds of Brodie, preface, p. lxi. The authority of the commissioners was further supported by letters under the Signet, dated 13th January 1685, charging all persons guilty of the crimes libelled, that is, sedition, intercommuning with rebels, fugitives, vagrant preachers, etc., refusing to renounce the Solemn League and Covenant, withdrawing from their parish kirks, attending house or field conventicles, and other similar offences of a more or less heinous nature, that they should appear and answer for their share in such practices. Copy Letters at Castle Grant. Messrs. Fraser of Brea, Alexander Hepburn, James Nimmo, Alexander Dunbar, James Urquhart, .James Park, and Thomas Ross are among those named as "outed" persons whom it was treasonable to have dealings with.

The Laird of Freuchie and his lady duly appeared before the commissioners, and were examined as to the charges against them. In his declaration, the Laird stated that Mr. Alexander Fraser frequented his house before the parliament, The parliament of 1681, the last parliament of King Charles II's reign. and prayed in it; that he gave him money upon the account of charity, but not for service; that after the parliament he put him away, and he had been but twice in his house since the parliament; that he had heard Mr. James Urquhart preach once at Lethen, and pray several times when he (the Laird) was there visiting his mother in-law; that he had heard Mr. Alexander Dunbar pray several times; that he saw James Nimmo at Lethen's house, and that he was free to declare on oath that he did not know him to be a rebel; that his lady did not frequent the parish church since 1679 till September last. He declared on oath that the above was truth, and that he was altogether free of the plot [304] of all treasonable designs, contributing money to Argyll, or favouring him or any rebels, or concealing or hearing high treason, and other articles of the libel. Copy Declaration and Deposition at Castle Grant.

Janet Brodie, Lady Grant, stated that "she had not kept the kirk till September last," as for nearly a year and a half they wanted a minister; that Mr. Alexander Fraser was Grant's servant before the Act of Indemnity, and prayed in the family; that she had heard Mr. James Urquhart and Mr. Alexander Dunbar pray and preach in Lethen since the Act of Indemnity, and that she saw James Nimmo there; that since the Indemnity, Mr. Alexander Fraser had been in her house and had prayed there; that it was when her mother was bedfast and sick that she heard Mr. Urquhart and Mr. Dunbar at Lethen, and that Mr. Alexander Fraser was a preacher. She further added to the above the statement that she heard sermon on Sabbath at Newtyle, on her journey from Edinburgh; that it was never her principle to abstain from hearing upon account of any disloyalty or disrespect to the Government; that Mr. Alexander Fraser was a preacher under the Bishops, but was put off; that he was not their servant since the Parliament, and that she knew not Nimmo to be a suspected person. Ibid.

The date of these depositions is not given, but on 11th February 1685, the commissioners pronounced sentence, in which, after a formal preamble in the terms of the criminal letters, they declared that "in respect the Lady Grant confesses two years and ane half's withdrawing from the ordinances, having and keeping ane unlicenced chaplane, hearing outed ministeris preach severall tyms. and that the Laird of Grant confesses the keeping of the said unlicensed minister in his family, and hearing ane outed minister preach once and pray severall tymes: They therefore fyne and amerciat the Laird of Grantt for his own and his Lady's delinquencies, irregularities, and disorders, in the sowm of fowrtie two thousand and fyve hundreth punds Scottis mone, and ordain the said Laird of Grant to make payment of the said fyne to his Majesteis cash keeper, betwixt and the first day of May next to come, under the paine of being lyable in a fyfth part more then the said fyne." Copy Sentence, etc., at Castle Grant.

[305] A few days after the sentence was pronounced, the Laird was charged to make payment of the fine within fifteen days, on pain of being put to the horn. Messenger's Charge, dated 20th February 1685, at Castle Grant. This he was by no means willing to do, and made efforts to have the fine remitted, or at least diminished. Reasons for the reconsideration and reversal of the sentence were drawn up to be presented to the Privy Council with a petition for review of the decreet. At a later date the Laird forwarded a petition to King James the Seventh, founding on the following facts: [1] That the oath of the party was the only means of probation used by the commissioners; [2] That in the letter written by the late King in relation to husbands being liable for their wives' fines, the husband's loyalty and regularity are appointed to be taken into consideration, and the petitioner therefore pleaded his own zeal and forwardness in 1679, and his recent services in the expedition against Argyll, which had occurred in the interval betwixt the imposition of the fine and the date of the petition. Draft Reasons and Petitions, ibid. The King took a favourable view of the matter, and in a formal letter, of date 9th January 1686, addressed to the Privy Council, he fully exonered and discharged the Laird of Freuchie of the amount of the fine. Vol. iii. of this work, p. 357. The reasons of this discharge are similar to those given in the petition, and need not be repeated, while the discharge itself was supplemented by another royal letter of same date, forbidding any one to trouble the Laird on account of his fine. Ibid. p. 249.

As reference has been made to the expedition against the Earl of Argyll, the Laird's share in that campaign may here be related. On the 2d of May 1685, the Earl of Argyll sailed from Holland with a fleet, intending to invade Scotland and raise a rebellion. In the previous month rumours of his purpose had reached the authorities, and preparations had been made for putting the kingdom in a state of defence, though it was not until Argyll had actually landed in Kintyre that the Laird of Freuchie was summoned to the aid of the Government. The terms of the first letters received by the Laird evidently had a veiled reference to his treatment by the Privy Council and his probable reluctance to do them [306] service. From Sir George Mackenzie of Rosehaugh, then Lord Advocate, he received the following:

"DEARE COOSEN, I conjure yow to shew your loyalty now or never - upon it depends the family, which was very honorable befor your tyme. Tak not the pett lyk a child, nor ill counsell lyk a foole, bot shew you principls to be good and your interest to be considerable. Beleev your
Coosen, GEO. MACKENZIE." Original Letter at Castle Grant.

This pithy letter is undated, but was probably written about the same time as one of nearly similar terms by another George Mackenzie, Lord Tarbat, who wrote on 16th May 1685. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 90. Lord Tarbat refers to a letter of the previous day from the Privy Council, giving formal notice of the Earl of Argyll's appearance on the coast, and desiring that the Laird would at once call together and despatch southward a detachment of his clan. Three hundred men well armed, and provisioned for twenty days, were to be at the head of Lochness by the 9th June next, under pain of being held as disaffected. ibid. p. 24. To this requisition Lord Tarbat adds the reminder that "it is not number but vigor and action that will recomend yow to your prince, and speak your vindication aloud." Ibid. p. 90. These letters were received on their way north by George, first Duke of Gordon, who sent them on to the Laird on 25th May, with further information as to Argyll's movements. ibid. The Duke writes heartily on behalf of Grant, and says significantly, "Your frinds and myn att Edenboro prommis rar things for us now, especially iff vee dooe veell."

The Laird responded readily to the Duke's good opinion of him and the Council's commands. Indeed, so vigorously did he set about raising his men, that one at least of his vassals remonstrated, and while expressing all readiness to answer the call to arms, protested that the proportion required by the Laird (six men out of each davoch) was too much. The vassal in question, John Grant of Ballindalloch, considered the requisition too intolerable a burden upon the tenantry, unless the ground was allowed to bear only grass. But he promised to levy the men competently. Ibid p. 91. This [307] letter was dated 27th May, and by the 5th June the Laird wrote to the Earl of Perth, then Chancellor, and to the Lord Advocate, that his men were ready, and that he would be at Lochness on the day appointed. He wrote also to Lord Tarbat, in each case expressing his pleasure at receiving the commission, and being thus able to manifest his loyalty. Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 25, 26. On the 3d of June the Duke of Gordon wrote to the Laird not to leave Strathspey until further orders, but to keep his men in all readiness to march. The Duke of Gordon himself advanced towards the west, and was arranging a junction with the Marquis of Athole, then Lord-Lieutenant of Argyllshire, when the capture of the Earl of Argyll brought the campaign to a sudden close. On the 23d June the Chancellor directed time Laird to march homewards with his men and disband them. The letter also conveyed the thanks of the Council to the chief himself, and those under his command. Ibid. p. 26.

Though the campaign against the Earl of Argyll was short and bloodless, the Laird's prompt obedience to the requisition made upon him favourably impressed the Government, and, as already narrated, enabled him to sue successfully for the remission of his fine, although, according to his own statement, he was forced to expend nearly £24,000 Scots ere he could get himself freed. In addition to this sum he also paid £30,000 Scots on behalf of his father-in-law, Alexander Brodie of Lethen, who had been fined to the extent of £40,000 Scots. The old man, deserted by his kinsmen, sent for his son-in-law, and after a pathetic scene, the latter consented to advance the amount of the fine for his father-in-law's relief. The Laird did this, though he considered himself wronged in regard to the disposition of the Lethen estate, which he had reason to expect would be provided to one of his own younger sons, but which had been entailed by Alexander Brodie upon his brother, David Brodie of Pitgaveny, to the prejudice of the Laird of Freuchie.

Upon somewhat doubtful authority the Laird is said to have been concerned in the battle of Mulroy, near Keppoch, known as the last clan battle in Scotland. MS. Anecdotes at Castle Grant. This battle was fought between the Laird of Mackintosh and Macdonald of Keppoch, the cause being a long-standing dispute betwixt their clans as to the lands of Glenroy and Glenspean.

[308] Mackintosh, armed with a commission from the Privy Council, and sup ported by a company of regular troops under their orders, marched into Keppoch, and arrived there about the end of July 1688. The Mackintoshes and Clan Chattan, p. 396. Keppoch and his clan prudently kept out of the way for a day or two until reinforced by their kinsmen of Glengarry and other clans. On the 4th of August, Keppoch, better known at a later date as "Coll of the Cowes," found himself strong enough to offer battle, and the two armies met on the side of the hill called Mulroy, near the river Roy, the result being that after a severe contest, Mackintosh's forces were defeated and himself taken prisoner.

The Laird of Mackintosh, however, was not long a captive. The Council's commission to him had, as usual, required the concurrence of neighbouring clans to execute the Council's will, and among these were the Grants and Macphersons. The last-named clan refused to follow Mackintosh into the Braes of Lochaber, but yet mustered strongly and set out for the scene of operations. They arrived too late for the battle, but as they offered to renew it, Keppoch deemed it best to surrender Mackintosh, who, it is said, was thus doubly humiliated, in being beaten by the Macdonalds and rescued by the Macphersons, both of which clans he despised. Ibid. pp. 398, 399; Skene's Highlanders, vol. ii. pp. 188, 189. Nothing is said of the conduct of the Grants in the affair, but the unknown chronicler of the clan claims the honour of the rescue for his own chief. lie says that "Laird Louis espoused Macintosh's cause against Capach, after the battle of Mulroy. Capach defeated Macintosh's clan, and took both Laird and Lady prisoners, but hearing the Laird of Grant was fast approaching to relieve Macintosh, thought it advisable to set both Laird and Lady at liberty." MS. Anecdotes at Castle Grant. The chronicler adds that Keppoch and his followers then dispersed among the hills, and that "Laird Lewis," after burning, at Mackintosh's desire, the houses of Keppoch and some others, which was actually done by a body of regular troops under the Council's orders, marched homewards with his men, "safe to his own country." But for the truth of this story there is no evidence, while it is more than
[309] probable that the Grants remained altogether neutral. No other basis for this tradition can be found than that the Grants were directed by the Privy Council to concur with Mackintosh.

But if the Laird's participation in this tribal feud is doubtful, he was soon called upon to play a part in a wider sphere, and to incur greater responsibilities, from which he did not shrink. Towards the end of the year 1688, in the month of October, while the Prince of Orange was making ready to come over to England, and the mind of the nation was ripe for the Revolution, the Laird of Freuchie was summoned to Edinburgh to receive the commands of the Privy Council. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 26. This letter was followed on 2d November by a letter from the Duke of Gordon, then Governor of Edinburgh Castle, desiring the Laird to raise a company of men for the service of King James the Seventh, the men to be sent to Stirling. Ibid. p. 27. It is not known whether the Laird at that time responded to either requisition, but he was certainly a member of that Convention of Estates called together by the Prince of Orange, which began its sittings on the 14th March 1689, and in his place among the barons he subscribed the minute which declared the convention to be a "free and lawful meeting of the Estates," and their resolution to "continue undissolved until they settle and secure the Protestant religion, the Government, laws, and liberties of the kingdom." This declaration was made before opening a letter addressed to the Estates by the self-exiled monarch, which was believed to contain instructions likely to impede the Convention. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. p. 9.

On the 18th March, John Graham, Viscount of Dundee, made his famous exit from Edinburgh, climbing the Castle rock on his way, to urge the Duke of Gordon to hold the fortress for King James. On the same day the Laird of Freuchie was nominated as one of a committee to consider the condition of the Highlands, and report. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. p. 12. At a previous meeting he had been appointed with others to consider what was fit for securing the peace. ibid. p. 10. On the 23d March he signed a congratulatory address to King William, Ibid. p. 20. and on the 26th he was one of those chosen by vote to act as a committee for settling the Government. Ibid. p. 22. The Laird was therefore one of [310] the framers of that resolution of the Estates which declared that King James had forfeited the right to the Crown, and that the throne had become vacant. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. p. 33. The same committee also framed the Claim of Right and the offer of the Crown to the King and Queen of England, in terms of which the Estates proclaimed William and Mary to be King and Queen of Scotland. Ibid. p. 38. A list of grievances was likewise drawn up, Ibid. p. 45. some of which led to discussion, but all which, with the Claim of Right, were read to and accepted by the new King and Queen before they took the oath. Ibid. p. 93.

The fact that the Laird of Freuchie was thus chosen by vote to take part in measures so greatly affecting the welfare of the nation, tends to show the confidence reposed in his loyalty to the State. The work of this Committee of Settlement, of which the Laird of Grant was a member, may have been the cause of his delay in hastening north, at the command of Major-General Mackay, to guard the fords of the Spey against Dundee, who, towards the end of April 1689, began his famous campaign on behalf of King James. It was certainly not from lack of loyalty, as on 19th April, the day preceding Dundee's leaving Glen Ogilvy, the Laird of Freuchie is named among those who offered to levy men for the public service, having volunteered to raise and equip six hundred men, and three days afterwards he was appointed colonel of his own regiment. Ibid. pp. 50, 57. For these levies he received warrant, on 25th April, to buy and import six hundred stand of arms, and on 7th May orders were given for the payment to him of £35 sterling, for the use of each company in his regiment. Ibid. p. 63, App. p. 10. On the 24th April the Laird was appointed, during pleasure, Sheriff of Inverness-shire, in room of the Earl of Murray, and on the 30th he, in common with other northern sheriffs, was commissioned to call together the heritors and fencible men within his jurisdiction, as well armed as possible to dissipate any rebel forces in that neighbourhood. ibid. App. p. 2.

These commissions did not, however, imply any military capacity in the Laird or others who raised men for the Government; and as the levies were officered by men of their own clan or friends, and not by experienced soldiers, the new regiments with their leaders frequently fell under the [311] censure of that somewhat rigid tactician and disciplinarian Major-General Mackay. Mackay's Memoirs, p. 7. He bestowed special blame on the Laird of Freuchie for not following directions in regard to the fords of Spey, "which wrong step of his was certainly without any design of prejudice to the service, tho' highly punishable had he been a man of service," that is a military man. Ibid. p. 10. The Viscount of Dundee passed to Inverness by the very fords which the Laird should have guarded, but he afterwards gave valuable aid to Mackay. He hastened north after that General, who had followed up Dundee and his small company as hotly as possible, and when he found they had crossed the Spey towards Inverness, had marched to Elgin. He did this because a return southward or even to delay where he was, would give Dundee time to make himself master of Elgin as well as Inverness, and of Moray, Ross, and Caithness. The General also expected succours from Sutherland, and kelp from the Lairds of Balnagown and Grant. When he reached Elgin he sent messengers to summon these persons to march to his assistance, and here he was joined by the Laird. Here also the General rested until Dundee, who had been joined at Inverness by Macdonald of Keppoch and a large number of his clan, should advance. While Mackay himself went with a body of horse to Inverness, he despatched the Laird back to his own country to prepare his men, giving instructions to him and also to Lord Strathnaver to levy the regiments for which they had commissions, with all speed, and to arm as many men as possible with suitable weapons. Ibid. pp. 14.17.

Having in these and other ways secured his position, and put Inverness in a state of defence, Mackay sent orders to the troops in the south to march northwards. These started accordingly, but were delayed in their progress by various causes, among others, ignorance of the country and exaggerated stories as to the strength of the enemy. Ramsay, their commander, had almost reached Ruthven, in Badenoch, when he returned to Perth, owing to Mackay's instructions to him being intercepted. Had he marched on, he would have escaped Dundee, and had he been attacked, he would have found safety in Strathspey, as the Laird of Freuchie, with seven or eight hundred men, was under orders to render assistance. Mackay [312] marched from Inverness to meet Ramsay, but finding that the latter had retired, and that Dundee had made a descent on Badenoch, proceeded towards Strathspey, the Laird being with him in his various movements.

Cut off for a time from his reinforcements, General Mackay made a forced march (part of a day and a whole night) to get between Dundee and his nearest help, the country of the Gordons, for the special purpose of securing "the Laird of Grant's interest," which was threatened, "it being a necessary maxim in the war for such as would gain and keep friends never to abandon them without necessity." This brought him to the "plains of Strathspey," and the General, finding his forces on level ground, made an unsuccessful attempt with his dragoons to surprise the enemy. Provisions and forage becoming scarce, by the Laird's advice the General encamped four miles further down the country. From this place he despatched orders to Forfar and Coupar-Angus for reinforcements, and gave directions how they would best reach his head-quarters, "by the road of Cairnmonth." Besides other messengers, he employed, as a special envoy for the sake of despatch, a trusty Highlander, one of Grant's tenants, who, as he was wont to trade in Strathdee and Braemar, could pass rapidly through these districts without suspicion by the disaffected there.

The General then turned his attention to the safety and comfort of his troops, and amid his somewhat prosaic narrative there is a gleam of the picturesque as he describes the spot selected for the time as his quarters, with due regard to security, food, and forage: "A summer-dwelling of Grant's," he writes, "where there were some meadows and fields of corn, This "summer dwelling" was Culnakyle, in Abernethy. proper for the nature of the party whose strength was most in horse." The situation, too, was well fortified by nature, for as the General's position faced towards the Gordon country, the Spey defended his rear, the stony Nethy guarded his right, and woods and marshes secured his camp in front, while within these limits lay a comparatively spacious plain suitable for the evolutions of his cavalry. But the season was in May and the weather cold, and, notwithstanding the oatmeal and sheep for the men, and forage for the horses, supplied from the Laird of Freuchie's [313] stores, in addition to what was brought from Moray, there was much scarcity in the little camp, and many horses died. Yet the officers and men never repined, though several times reduced to great want. They were also kept on the alert by their scouts, trusty men of the Laird's and recommended by him, who went backwards and forwards betwixt the royal troops and those of the enemy posted some miles up the river, and reported his movements.

These men of Grant's in the end became the General's most reliable sources of information, for here, at Culnakyle, it was that he had first notice of the disaffected state of his men. He had been joined by Lieut. Colonel Sir Thomas Livingstone, with two troops of dragoons, for whose movements the ground, as stated, was suitable. The General kept his whole party under arms, the horses saddled and bridled, in the night, with outposts of dragoons in the woods, and foot-soldiers along the banks of the little river, probably the Nethy, and so believed himself safe against surprise. But two days after Livingstone had joined Mackay, the latter was informed by two deserters that he was betrayed by his men. After hearing their story, the General despatched the fellows to Ballachastell. where a garrison was stationed, there to be kept in ward, and notwithstanding the suspicions thus cast on the loyalty of his men, he determined to remain at his post. In this purpose he was confirmed by the advice of his principal officers, and by the Laird of Freuchie, whose usefulness and activity are specially acknowledged. Mackay's Memoirs, p. 29.

That the Laird of Freuchie's men were more or less actively engaged at this time in the royal service, is evident from references in General Mackay's own narrative. In the end of May or beginning of June, about sixty of the clan Grant, under their Captain. John Forbes of Culloden, marched into Mackay's camp, bringing the intelligence that the castle of Ruthven, in Badenoch, which they had lately garrisoned, was now a smoking ruin. On the 29th May, Dundee had summoned the castle to surrender, and a few days later, after a sharp encounter, the defenders, weakened by want of provisions and succours, yielded to Keppoch. The garrison were allowed to march out with the honours of war, but the castle [314] was given to the flames. Captain Forbes also brought other intelligence which only too surely proved that Mackay's men were in league with the enemy, and the General, according to his own statement, now chiefly relied upon the Grants for information regarding the rebel forces. Mackay's Memoirs, p. 30.

Captain Forbes also stated that as he and his men marched through Dundee's camp, they saw the horses saddled in readiness for some expedition, and almost while his narrative was being told, news came that the enemy was in motion towards the camp. General Mackay summoned his officers, gave orders for the disposition of the men, and prepared to break up his residence in the Laird's "summer dwelling." But while thus making ready for the march, the General did not forget his host. Calling the Laird to him, he expressed regret that this movement would leave the Grant country exposed to the ravage of the rebels, which yet he hoped would be but for a few days. He urged the Laird to bid his tenants remove their cattle out of the enemy's way. That the General's advice was disinterested, and by no means without foundation, may be shown from his own words in a letter to Lord Melvill a few days later. He writes in view of a journey south, and states that he will do his best to settle matters in the north, even if he should leave it, but, he adds, "Som perticullar men may com to suffer, perticullarly the Laird of Grant, at whom they have a great prejudice, as well as at the rest of our friends, but he lyes the most exposed of all; but if the whole be saved, the perticular breaches may be easily made up." Ibid. Appendix, p. 230. The General records that to his arguments the Laird replied, "Tho' all his interest should be lost thereby, he would not wish the General to make one step to the prejudice of their Majesties' service."

General Mackay waited until the night began to fall, and then, when the enemy were about three miles from him, retreated down the Spey, making a long night march, and did not halt till he reached Balveny. His movements for the next few days do not concern this narrative, but five days later, having in the interim received reinforcement, he was back again at Culnakyle, while Dundee was in retreat. On the evening of his arrival he was threatened by a body of the rebels, and sent out a party of two hundred horse commanded by an English officer. The Laird of Freuchie [315] acted as their guide, and they encountered the enemy, a body of Macleans, on their march to join Dundee. The Highlanders pressed hard upon the Laird's party, but the latter were relieved by a detachment from Mackay's army, who pursued the enemy for some distance, but they retired rapidly with but slight loss; and also, it is asserted, not without making spoil of some of the dragoons' horses. Mackay's Memoirs, p. 33; Memoirs of Lochiel, p. 244.

This was the last appearance of the Laird in active service for some time. His regiment, it would appear, had been levied, but was not properly equipped. Such as they were, however, their colonel and they were left with other forces, under the command of Sir Thomas Livingstone, to guard the north while General Mackay proceeded to the south. The battle of Killiecrankie, on 27th July 1689, and the death of Dundee, made a pause in the campaign for some time, but before that date the Grants, or a portion of them, were involved in a contest which had important consequences, and nearly caused a rupture among Dundee's followers. It would appear, though the point is not certain, that the Laird of Freuchie accompanied Mackay on his retreat from Culnakyle, but whether this was so or not, he captured some stragglers of Dundee's men, members of the clan Cameron, who, either at Edinglassie or elsewhere on the march, were found annexing "the most portable moveables they could fall upon." Memoirs of Lochiel, p. 244. For this the Laird promptly hanged them.

The Camerons nursed their wrath against the Laird and the Clan Grant for that and other causes, until the first opportunity of retaliating. This soon occurred, though the immediate occasion was prompted by private revenge. Dundee employed the time of Mackay's absence in the south in recruiting his forces, and endeavouring to secure a supply of provisions. To obtain the latter, many of the men were allowed to go home, and while waiting their return, and that of others, to the general rendezvous, a party of the Camerons made use of the delay to avenge their comrades. In doing so without the orders of their chief they expected his approbation, because they had seen his anger at the fate of their clansmen, and they also thought that Dundee would be glad of a drove of cattle from the enemy's country. They therefore sallied forth secretly [316] in considerable force to Urquhart, thence to drive a prey, but found the Grants ready to receive them.

Among the Grants was, it is said, "one Macdonald, of Glengary's family," who imagined that the simple merit of his name and clan was sufficient to protect himself and the whole name of Grant from the revenge of the Camerons. Memoirs of Lochiel, p. 253. This worthy came boldly up to the Camerons, and, "acquainting them with his name and genealogy," desired their peaceable departure. This they refused, but so far respected his name as to warn him to separate from the Grants, whom they meant to chastise. This kind advice he declined to take, and "daring them to do their worst, departed in a huff," and the fray began with an onset by the Camerons. Their chronicler asserts that the Grants were defeated and dispersed, and their cattle carried in triumph to Dundee's rendezvous in Lochaber. But the matter did not end there. The Macdonald was killed in the conflict, and his nominal chief, Glengarry, resented his death so highly that he demanded satisfaction from Lochiel. Words ran high, and Glengarry's behaviour at one time threatened a split in the camp, but Dundee succeeded in pacifying the chief, who, it is also said, acted more from policy than from anger. ibid. pp. 254, 255.

Evidence from another source corroborates the invasion of Urquhart by a body of rebels. Sir James Leslie, one of the officers left by Mackay in the north, in a letter to that General says: "I am certainely inform'd that 500 of the rebells were come to Urquett; they threatned the castle, but I looke upon it to be in little danger." He names a Captain Grant as commander of that fortress and as taking provisions to the place, and states his intention of sending for three companies of Colonel Grant's regiment and others to strengthen his position, which he believes to be threatened. Mackay's Memoirs, Appendix, pp. 299, 300. 6th December 1669. Some weeks later General Mackay wrote to Lord Melvill, "The Laird of Grant's regement in the north about Indernesse have made lately, out of houses where they are partly posted, som successfull interpryses upon thier neighbouring rebells, because they know the convenience of the ground," which he alleges other troops in Blair Athole and elsewhere were not able to do, being strangers in the district. He [317] therefore deprecates any interference with his arrangements, or any changing of the troops from place to place. Mackay's Memoirs, Appendix, p. 315. 31st December 1689. This shows that the Laird's regiment was actively employed.

As to the appearance of the Laird's regiment, it is always favourably spoken of. Referring to it shortly after 1st June 1689, General Mackay in his narrative describes it as levied, but as yet without clothes, arms, or discipline, and therefore not to be wholly depended on. Mackay's Memoirs, p. 40. It was left at Inverness and Elgin to defend these places and the country round, being quartered there along with Lord Strathnaver's regiment. At a later date (12th October) General Mackay writes to Lord Melvill his belief that "Strathnaver and Grant have as good men as any of the rest." Mackay's Memoirs, Appendix, p. 286. Ten days later lie expresses an opinion that they are the "best and compleetest." ibid. p. 290. This however, was while they were still without proper equipment. Sir James Leslie, on 6th December, refers to these regiments as still without clothes, and ill armed, "verry good bodies of men, but have neither swords nor bagganetts." ibid. p. 299. An order, however, had been given to Colonel Grant's men to receive their arms and clothing some days before, and, as has been shown, they took some share in the active service of the campaign.

After the close of the year 1689, nothing is known of any further activity on the part of the Laird's regiment until a later date, when the tide of battle once more rolled towards Strathspey. The death of Viscount Dundee threw the conduct of King James's affairs into the hands of officers inferior in talent, but also specially inferior in their knowledge of Highland warfare. These were Colonel Cannon, and after him Major-General Buchan. The former took command immediately after Dundee's death, and for some time carried on the rebellion in a desultory manner. The Highland army received a severe check at Dunkeld, but the approach of winter caused a suspension of hostilities, and in April 1690 Major-General Buchan took the field on behalf of King James. He was not at first joined in great numbers by the clans, as the spring operations were not completed, but a small force of twelve hundred men was placed at his disposal.

[318] With a portion of this force, or about eight hundred men, General Buchan marched through Lochaber and Badenoch, on his way to the country of the Gordons, where he hoped to obtain reinforcements. He reached Culnakyle, in Abernethy, where a council of war was held, and the next day (30th April 1690), contrary to the advice of his Highland officers, he marched down the Spey and encamped on the Haughs of Cromdale. His progress had been marked by the garrison then posted in Ballachastell, and the captain in command informed General Sir Thomas Livingstone, then about eight miles off, of the presence of the rebel army. Livingstone's force was composed of three hundred men of his own regiment, three hundred of the Clan Grant, Mackay's Memoirs, p. 95. Mackay says, "Six companies of Grant's regiment. making about 800 men." This, on his own showing, is an error, but it may refer to the full complement of the regiment, while only a select detachment was with Livingstone. with two troops of horse, and other regiments, in all about twelve hundred men. On receiving news of Buchan's advance, Livingstone hastened forward, until within two miles of Ballachastell, the commander of which caused the gates to be closed, that no intelligence might in any way be conveyed to General Buchan of the vicinity of the royal troops.

Although night fell while he was on his march, Livingstone, yielding to advice, pressed forward and arrived at or near the castle about two o'clock in the morning of the 1st of May. His men were tired; but the captain of the castle (who, it is said, was Captain John Grant of Easter Elchies) showed him the enemy's fires, told him they were ignorant of his approach, advised an immediate attack, and offered himself to guide him. Livingstone called his officers together, and sent them to their several detachments to ask the men if they could bear a little more fatigue. The reply being in the affirmative, they were allowed half an hour to refresh themselves. They then marched down to a ford below Dalchapple, which they found guarded by a hundred of the enemy. A detachment was left to occupy their attention, while Captain Grant, and also, it is said, Alexander Grant of Burnside, guided the main body, consisting of Highlanders and some troops of horse, to another ford a quarter of a mile further down the river, which was unguarded. Here they crossed and took the enemy by surprise, and, according to one account, a considerable [319] number were slain, as many as four hundred being killed or taken prisoners, while Sir Thomas Livingstone sustained little or no loss. A fog which rested on the summit of the hills favoured the escape of the fugitives, by causing Livingstone's dragoons to desist from pursuit. Mackay's Memoirs, p. 95.

Thus was fought the battle of Cromdale, which, though the force engaged on each side was small, practically brought the civil contention to a close. The event was celebrated in the song, "The Haughs of Cromdale," the first verses of which are:

"As I came in by Auchindoun,
A little wee bit frae the town,
When to the Highlands I was bound,
To view the haughs of Cromdale,

I met a man in tartan trews,
I speer'd at him what was the news;
Qao' he, the Highland army rues
That e'er we came to Cromdale.

We were in bed, Sir, every man,
When th' English host upon us came,
A bloody battle then began
Upon the haughs of Cromdale.

The English horse they were so rude,
They bathed their hoofs in Highland blood,
But our brave clans, they boldly stood,
Upon the haughs of Cromdale.

But, alas! we could no longer stay,
For o'er the hills we came away.
And sole we do lament the day
That e'er we came to Cromdale."
Hogg's Jacobite Relics, vol. i. p. 3. Blackwood1,1819. The remaining part of this song erroneously refers to another battle-probably that of Auldearn.

The Laird of Freuchie himself was not present at the battle, having returned to his duties as Member of Parliament, and taken the oath of allegiance on 15th April 1690. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix.p.109. But his services and those of his regiment were always gratefully acknowledged by Major-General Mackay, who constantly mentions the Laird in the most favourable manner. Even when [320] Mackay, after many applications, obtained leave from the Government to raise a fort at Inverlochy (now Fort-William), he thought of the Grants and the effect it might have on their interests. The Laird's regiment, at least a large portion of it, between four and five hundred men, were selected to form part of the garrison of the new fort, a position to be shared by the Cameronians, if the latter would consent, being one at that time requiring the utmost loyalty in the troops selected. Mackay's Memoirs, Appendix, p. 334. Letter to Duke of Hamilton, 10th July 1690 That his confidence was justified so far, may be gathered from a letter to the Privy Council on 2d September 1690, in which Mackay says, while urging on the Government the care of Fort-William, "He (the commandant there) complains of neither sicknesse nor desertion, and praises much Grant's major, of whom he hath great help." Ibid. p. 354. Even previous to the erection of the fort. while still on his way to Inverlochy, the General, writing to the Privy Council from his old camp at Culnakyle, refers to the intended junction of' the forces in the following terms: "I wish also your Grace and Lordships take into your consideration the losses that necessarily the Laird of Grant's countrey shall soustain by this junction of the forces, and to dispach the said Laird to his countrey who can easily keep som of his disaffected neighbours in aw, perticularly Strathdown, Glenlievet, and Strath Don," etc. Mackay's Memoirs, Appendix, p. 330. 28th June 1690. The General also recommended the Government to deal with the Laird about wood to be supplied to fit up the old castle of Ruthven for a small garrison, one reason for this being, that such a garrison would keep the neighbourhood quiet, and the Laird would benefit thereby. Ibid. p. 339. 26th July 1690.

When the war came to an end, and the country gradually became settled, the Laird of Freuchie continued steadily to discharge his duties as a Member of Parliament. After the passing, on 4th July 1690, of the act rescinding all fines and forfeitures inflicted (luring the two preceding reigns from 1st January 1665 to 5th November 1688, the Laird made some efforts to have his own case considered, in regard to the tine paid by him on behalf of Brodie of Lethen, but what success he had cannot be gathered from the Records of Parliament.

[321] The Laird was apportioned a considerable share of work in the public service. On 4th July 1690, he was appointed one of the Commissioners for visiting Universities and Schools, Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. p. 164. and on the 18th of the same month he was placed on the Commission for Plantation of Kirks, Ibid. p. 188. a position in which he is said to have displayed much zeal. So desirous was he to have "legal" ministers in his own neighbourhood, that he removed men from Cromdale, Duthil, and Abernethy parishes respectively, and shut up their churches in 1690 or 1691, till properly qualified ministers were found to occupy them. Shaw's Moray, p. 36.

The remainder of the Laird's parliamentary career may be shortly stated. He continued to represent the shire of Inverness in Parliament until the Union in 1707, his colleague during part of his term of office being Forbes of Culloden. Besides the measures already referred to, the Laird took part in several others. On the death of Queen Mary in 1695, the Laird was one of the three persons appointed to draw up an address of condolence to King William, and was also nominated to sit on the Committee for Security of the Kingdom. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. p. 351. A year later he subscribed the declaration pronouncing King William truly and lawfully King, and binding the subscribers to defend His Majesty. Ibid. vol. x. p. 10. In 1701, the Laird was one of those who dissented from an address to the King on the vexed question of the settlement of Darien, but he voted for an Act declaring that the Colony was a rightful settlement. Ibid. pp. 246, etc. In 1705 the Laird joined in the protest against the Union of the Kingdoms, unless the Alien Bill was repealed. These, with a few other measures of minor importance, sum lip the Laird's appearances in Parliamentary annals, and they show that he took an active interest in national affairs.

On 28th February 1694 he received from William and Mary a charter erecting his whole lands of Freuchie and others into a Regality, to be called the REGALITY OF GRANT, and ordaining the castle and manor place of Freuchie to be called in all time coming the CASTLE OF GRANT; also the town formerly called Castletown of Freuchie to be called the town and [322] burgh of Grant, etc., Original Charter at Castle Grant; confirmed by Parliament on 12th October 1696, vol. iii. of this work, p. 476. as already narrated in the Introduction. From this date the Laird of Freuchie changed his formal designation and became the Laird of Grant. Previous to this the Laird had been formally authorised to have within his bounds various free fairs, where all commodities might be bought and sold. An Act was passed allowing a fair to be held at the kirk of Kyllemoir in Urquhart yearly in August, to be called "Lovis Faire"; another fair there yearly in November, to be named "Lady Fair"; a yearly fair at Ballachastell in April, to be called "Grantowne Fair"; another there in August, to be called "Castle Fair;" a yearly fair at the Kirk of Duthil in June, and a yearly fair at Abernethy in November, to be called respectively "Bettie's Fair" and "Kathrin's Fair": besides a weekly market at Ballachastell. See dates, etc., in Extract Act, vol. iii. of this work, p. 359.

The Estates of Parliament, in 1695, took up the question of the losses sustained by the Laird of Grant from the rebels, and by the quarterings of the regular troops, in the years 1689 and 1690. The Committees appointed to examine the matter reported that the losses of the Laird of Grant and his vassals and tenants of the five parishes of Strathspey was £76,152, 18s. 8d. Scots, of which £7190, 2s. 8d. Scots was occasioned by the regular forces; that the losses by tenants and possessors of the barony of Urquhart amounted to £44,333, 5s. 2d. Scots, of which £2000 was for injury done to the house of Urquhart and low buildings by several soldiers of His Majesty's regular forces when they lay in garrison there. Besides these the Laird of Grant declared that he lost his rents of the barony of Urquhart for the years 1689, 1690, 1691, 1692, and 1693, being six thousand pounds yearly, extending to thirty thousand pounds Scots. The whole sum of the loss suffered by the Laird of Grant, his vassals and tenants, amounted to £120,486, 3s. 10d. Scots, besides the £30,000 referred to as five years' rent of the barony of Urquhart. The Parliament accordingly recommended the Laird of Grant to His Majesty's gracious consideration for repayment of this large sum, estimated at about £12,000 sterling. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. pp. 416, 427; vol. iii. of this work, p. 482. No benefit, however, resulted [323] from this recommendation, and although the subject was again brought up in the Scots Parliament in 1707, and by successive Lairds of Grant, for a long time all efforts to obtain indemnity for these losses and other expenditure were fruitless.

Reference has already been made to the appointment, in 1689, of the Laird of Grant, then of Freuchie, to be Sheriff of Inverness-shire, which appointment was duly approved. His commission as Sheriff Principal was continued by Queen Anne, Original Commission, 24th April 1708, at Castle Grant. and he probably held the office till his death. His promptitude in doing justice seems to have been much impressed upon those tinder his jurisdiction, if the traditions regarding his severity be correct. His treatment of the Camerons who were caught plundering has been stated in connection with the war of 1689, but it was probably carried out in his capacity as Sheriff of Inverness. The anonymous writer of anecdotes, already referred to, who devotes his narrative chiefly to " "Laird Lewis," states that there were nine Camerons, all of whom were hanged in one day at Tom-na-croich, i.e. the place of the gallows, a little hill above Duthil. Two of these were gentlemen, and the Laird was on this occasion so exasperated against these Highland freebooters that he never afterwards missed an opportunity of inflicting the extreme penalty of the law where it was merited.

The same chronicler, however, tells another story which shows that "law" did not always limit the Laird's actions, when hanging was in question. No date is given, but it was after the Laird became Sheriff A "gentleman of the name of Macgregor," driving a "spraith" from the Laird's country, was apprehended by a party of Grants who went in pursuit, and carried prisoner to Inverness. Letters were addressed to the Laird, as Sheriff, by Lord Strathallan, Glengyle, and other friends of the captive, which, instead of pleading for favour to the prisoner, declared that " though Macgregor was guilty, yet if the Sheriff hanged him, they would have a Grant's head for every finger in both his hands." The Laird's reply was that if the prisoner on trial was clearly proved to be guilty, hanged he should be, "though a hundred heads should be lost on both sides." Macgregor was duly convicted, and condemned. On the way to execution, [324] accompanied by the Sheriff, the condemned man was met by an express bearing a reprieve, which, without opening, the Sheriff placed "between the criminal's neck and the rope wherewith he was fastened, and thereby hanged both at the same time." The chronicler of this remarkable tradition adds that this act caused a considerable sensation, but that by his own influence and the representations of Forbes of Culloden, his Parliamentary colleague, the Laird of Grant escaped censure.

The same narrator tells several other stories of this Laird. One of these refers to the later years of the Laird's life, and, whether true or not, it indicates that he left behind him a character for firmness and energy. The Earl of Mar, while Secretary of State for Scotland, one day meeting the Laird in Edinburgh, asked him to dine. In conversation after dinner the Earl complained of his vassals, the Farquharsons of Braemar and the Forbeses of Strathdon, that they were disobedient, cut his woods, killed his deer, and paid no regard to his bailies or factors, but that though Secretary of State, he did not choose to ask for a military force to oblige them to listen to law and reason. Grant replied that if the Earl would do the first favour he asked, he would act as his bailie and bring the refractory vassals to order. Mar eagerly accepted the offer, promising his friendship for life in return for such a service. When the news of their chief's undertaking reached Strathspey, the clan were "greatly affronted.. . .looking upon it as an office derogatory to the honour of the Laird of Grant, to be bailie to the Earl of Mar or any other subject." The Laird, however, would not resile from his word. Raising a body of between four and five hundred men, he went with forty or fifty greyhounds under a pretext of hunting in the Earl of Mar's forest, where he killed some small deer. He then invited all the gentlemen vassals to meet him at the old Castletown of Braemar, where the Bailie Courts were held. After dinner and several toasts, the Laird announced his promise to the Earl of Mar, and his purpose to carry it out. He told his hearers "in fair words, that if, upon their honours they promised to be faithful and honest to Lord Mar and his doers in all time, in as far as law required, he would engage to procure them Lord Mar's forgiveness; but if they did not, that he would summon them all to a fenced court, and put the law in execution without feud or favour." [325] he allowed them till ten o'clock next morning to give a reply, and they responded by promising all he desired. The Laird discharged all former factors and bailies, and appointed two, one as his own substitute and another as a forester, leaving Lord Mar to name his own factors. On returning home, the Laird informed the Earl of the result of his proceedings, and received a letter of thanks, "wrote in the strongest terms of friendship." MS. "Anecdotes" at Castle Grant.

The same writer refers to an incident with which this Laird was also connected, namely, the trial of James Macpherson and others at Banff, in the year 1700. It is said that Sir Walter Scott intended to introduce Macpherson, to whose history a romantic interest attached, into the pages of fiction, and "Macpherson's Lament" will be known to every reader of Burns. The circumstances regarding the capture and execution of Macpherson have been told and retold elsewhere, Miscellany of the Spalding Club, vol. iii. pp. 175-191; Gordon's Chronicles of Keith, pp. 37-43. p. 190. and it need only be mentioned here that he was the leader of a gang of gipsies, who roamed through the North country, and, by their audacity in plundering, caused considerable terror to the inhabitants. Alexander Duff, Laird of Braco, had long wished to arrest the gang, but stood in awe of the Laird of Grant, who regarded some of the marauders as his tenants, and felt bound to protect his jurisdiction from encroachment. These tenants were two of Macpherson's comrades, Peter and Donald Brown, who usually resided near Castle Grant. The Laird of Braco, however, made an attempt at Keith to seize the robbers, and succeeded in arresting Macpherson and Peter Brown. It is related that the Laird of Grant attempted a rescue, and was successful so far that the culprits escaped, but they were retaken and placed in safe custody. Gordon's Chronicles of Keith, pp. 37, 38.

Macpherson, Peter and Donald Brown, with a fourth named James Gordon, were tried before the Sheriff of Banff on 7th November 1700. A claim was made by the Laird of Grant that the Browns, being his vassals, should be remitted to his jurisdiction, but this plea was repelled. The trial went on, and the prisoners were found guilty, and, at different dates, sentenced to death. Miscellany of the Spalding Club, vol. iii. The author of the Chronicles of Keith states [326] that only Macpherson was executed, and that the Browns were thought to have escaped; but the unknown biographer of Laird Lewis supplies some information regarding the Browns.

Peter Brown, it is said, had a fair share of good sense and good mariners, and "could behave himself in gentlemen's company." Macpherson was rough and disqualified for good society. One accomplishment was common to both, they were good musicians. The Laird of Grant took an interest in Brown, regretted his wild life, and endeavoured to wean him from it by inviting him to Castle Grant. Brown made fair promises, and stayed for some time at or near Castle Grant, but at last made an appointment to meet Macpherson at Keith, where, as stated, they were captured in company. The Duke of Gordon is said to have made some interest for Macpherson, This is not borne out by the records of the trial as did the Laird of Grant for Brown, but the Sheriff condemned them, and thereby incurred the Laird's displeasure. The Laird, however, obtained a reprieve for Brown, on his signing an act of voluntary banishment for life from Scotland, while Macpherson was hanged, which gave rise to the song:

"The Laird of Grant, that Highland Saint,
Of mighty majesty,
Did plead the cause of Peter Brown
And let Macpherson die."

The Laird then sent Brown to John Duke of Argyll, under whose command he behaved so well that the Duke selected him as one of his personal attendants. Some years afterwards, the Laird of Grant desired to have Brown home again, and the Duke promised to send him. But Brown, earnestly begging to be allowed to attend the Duke at the battle of Malplaquet, had his usual post that day, and was shot while on duty. MS. "Anecdotes," at Castle Grant.

The Laird of Grant, no doubt feeling age drawing upon him, made a settlement by way of entail of the estate of Grant upon his eldest son, Colonel Alexander Grant, younger of Grant, who had already for many years acted as Bailie of the Regality of Grant. The entail was made as part of the family arrangement on his son's second marriage. Laird [327] Ludovick reserved to himself an annuity of £300 sterling yearly, and a jointure to Jean Houstoun, his second spouse. Charter, dated 9th July 1710, at Castle Grant.

In the end of the same year, 1710, the following touching incident narrated by the writer of the "Anecdotes" took place. The Laird, it is said, sent his eldest son Alexander to London to press his claims for indemnity on the Government. These claims were, however, as already stated, rejected. This statement may refer to the application made in 1707; but it is further related that on being thus refused, Mr. Grant of Grant returned home, and "having obtained his father's leave, made all the gentlemen and commons of his name wear whiskers, and make all their plaids and tartan of red and green, and commanded them all to appear before him at Ballintome, the ordinary place of rendezvous, in that uniform, in kilt and under arms, which order was complied with." The old Laird attended the meeting with his son, and made a speech to the men drawn up in full order, telling them that he being now old was no longer able to command them as formerly, and that he therefore devolved the leadership upon his son, who, "they saw, promised as well, if not better, than ever he did." He expected therefore that they would maintain "the same good character, with regard to courage and unanimity, which they bore while he commanded them." Then addressing himself to his son, he said, "My dear Sandy, I make you this day a very great present, viz., the honour of commanding the Clan Grant, who, while I conducted them, though in troublesome times, yet they never misbehaved, so that you have them this day without spot or blemish. I hope and beg you will use them as well as I did in supporting their public and private interests agreeable to the laws of liberty and probity as are now happily established in our lands. God bless you all!" MS. " Anecdotes" at Castle Grant.

Thus, according to his admiring biographer, did this Laird of Grant resign the leadership of his Clan, and from or about this period the old Laud took no active interest in public affairs. His son, in the intervals of his military duties, managed the estates of Grant, with the assistance of his sister Anne, and of her husband, Lieutenant-Colonel William Grant of Ballindalloch. But though thus relieved of the care of his large estates, the Laird's later years were somewhat disturbed by differences between [328] himself and his son, the young Laird, chiefly, it would appear, through the stepmother, Jean Houstoun. The Earl of Murray, a near relative by marriage of the young Laird, endeavoured to make peace between the' father and son, Letter dated 19th June 1711, vol. ii. of this work, p. 93. and their differences were composed by arbitration in the following year.

By this arrangement, to which not only the Laird and his eldest son, but also Jean Houstoun and her friends were parties, the Laird's annuity of £300 sterling was reduced to £200 sterling, with the provision that on the death of his second wife, it should revert to the original sum. Questions about the lady's jointure lands, and the furniture and plate in the family mansions, were also disposed of. Extract Submission, and Decreet Arbitral, pronounced 10th July 1712, at Castle Grant. But the result does not appear to have been altogether satisfactory, as the Laird and the Brigadier were involved in litigation in the Court of Session in 1715, respecting the same affairs. Information for Brigadier-General Alexander Grant, dated 1715, ibid.

Five years after his settlement of the estates, the Laird died at Edinburgh in November 1716. His remains were interred in the Abbey Church of Holyroodhouse, on the 19th November of that year, in the north-west corner of the church, four feet from the north wall. The Burial Register of Holyrood says that he was laid in the same place where his father had been buried on the 10th of October 1663. The entry is as follows: Buried 19th November 1716. Ludovick Grant of that Ilk was buried in the church of Holyroodhouse, and lyes in the north-west corner of the church four foots from the north wall. The head of his coffin lyes below the north-west window, and the foot of his coffin four foot from the wall upon the west side of the north door, the foot of his coffin being exactly where the head of his father's was laid upon the 10th of October 1663.

Ludovick Grant was twice married. His first wife was Janet Brodie, only child and heiress of Alexander Brodie of Lethen. The marriage contract is dated 21st December 1671, Vol. iii. of this work, p. 469. and six days later the marriage took place. Diaries of the Lairds of Brodie, p. 323. From the diary of the lady's kinsman, the Laird of Brodie, it would appear that the Laird of Grant's friends opposed the marriage. Ibid. p. 319. This fact is commented on by the chronicler already quoted, who says that the Clan opposed the match, deeming the lady, though a great fortune, to be the Laird's inferior. But he adds, "she proved so wise, good, and [329] virtuous a woman, as gained her in a very short time the esteem and respect of friends and strangers." MS. "Anecdotes," at Castle Grant. Janet Brodie, Lady of Grant, died in 1697, Shaw's Moray, p. 37. and the Laird, some years later, married again. His second wife was Jean, daughter of Sir John Houstoun, and relict of Sir Richard Lockhart of Lee. The contract of marriage between the Laird and this Lady is dated 1st March 1701, Memorandum of Contents of Contract at Castle Grant. and by her the Laird had no issue. She was alive in 1727, and in that year entered into an agreement with her stepson, Sir James Grant of Grant, by which she consented to modify the allowance of four thousand merks to which she was entitled in terms of her contract of marriage, to three thousand merks. Extract Contract between James Grant of Grant and Mrs. Jean Houstoun, dated 14th March and 16th June 1627, at Castle Grant.

By his first wife Ludovick Grant had issue, five sons and four daughters. The sons were:
1. John, who died young, and unmarried, on 11th April 1682. Diaries of the Lairds of Brodie, p. 467.
2. Alexander, who became a Brigadier-General in the army, and succeeded his father. Of him a Memoir follows.
3. James, who succeeded his brother Alexander as Laird of Grant, and became Sir James Grant of Grant, Baronet. A Memoir of him follows.
4. George, described in 1704 as third son of Ludovick Grant, his eldest brother John having predeceased. He became Major George Grant of Culbin, and was for a time Governor of Fort-George. In 1733 he acquired the lands of Culbin and others from his nephew, Mr. Ludovick Colquhoun of Luss, afterwards Sir Ludovick Grant of Grant, to whom, after the death of the Major in December 1755, unmarried, they reverted.
5. Lewis, who became a Colonel in the army. In a petition to the King for preferment to the post of Lieutenant-Colonel, he states he had had the honour to serve the Crown twenty-nine years, particularly in Scotland during the rebellion of 1715. He states that during that time he had been twenty-six years Captain in the army and thirteen years Major in the regiment of foot [330] commanded by the Earl of Orkney. Draft Petition, undated, at Castle Grant. The rank of Colonel appears, however, to have been conferred in or before 1731. He married an Irish lady, whose name has not been ascertained. After his marriage he purchased the estate of Dunphail from the Dunbars, but with the express intention that it should not be settled on the heirs of that marriage. Letter at Castle Grant. Having gone to Jamaica, he died in Kingston on 11th March 1742. He left a daughter Anne, who married Mr. Patrick Grant, minister of Logie Easter, but the property of Dunphail, with the rest of his estate, passed to his nephew, Sir Ludovick Grant of Grant.

The daughters were:
1. Elizabeth, who married (con tract dated 15th January 1704) Original Contract at Castle Grant. Hugh Rose of Kilravock, in the county of Nairn. They had issue.
2. Anne, who married Lieutenant-Colonel William Grant of Ballindalloch. The contract for their marriage is dated 30th October 1711. Original Contract of Marriage at Ballindalloch. She was the ancestress of the present Sir George Macpherson Grant of Ballindalloch.
3. Janet, who married, before 1716, Sir Roderick Mackenzie of Scatwell, and had issue.
4. Margaret, who married, in December 1716, amid great rejoicings, Simon Fraser, Lord Lovat, by whom she had issue. She died, after child-birth, in July 1729, and her husband bewailed her loss in passionate grief. Vol. ii. of this work, p. 298.

Volume 1 Chapter 15