A.D. 1613-1623.
KING OF GREAT BRITAIN:--James I., 1603-1625.
Continued animosity between the Earls of Caithness
and Sutherland--The latter imprisoned as a suspected
Catholic--Formidable Rebellion in the South Hebrides--Suppressed
by the Earl of Argyle--Fresh intrigues of the Earl of
Caithness--His oppressions--Burning of the corn at Sanset--Legal
proceedings against the Guns--Agreement between the Earl of
Caithness, Sir Robert Gordon, and Lord Forbes--Lord Berridale
imprisoned--Conditions of release--Put in possession of
the family Estates--Alliance between the Earl of Caithness
and Sir Donald Mackay--Sir Robert Gordon protects the clan
Gun--Mackay’s attempts against the Clan--Mackay and Sir Robert
Gordon reconciled--Quarrel between the Earl of Enzie and the
clan Chattan--Slaughter of Thomas Lindsay--Hostile preparations
against the Earl of Caithness--Expedition into Caithness--Flight
of the Earl--Reduction and pacification of Caithness.
As the Privy Council showed no inclination to decide the questions
submitted to them by the Earl of Caithness and his adversaries, the
earl sent his brother, Sir John Sinclair of Greenland, to Edinburgh,
to complain of the delay which had taken place, and desired him to
throw out hints, that if the earl did not obtain satisfaction for
his supposed injuries, he would take redress at his own hands. The
earl thought that he would succeed, by such a threat, in moving the
council to decide in his favour, for he was well aware that he was
unable to carry it into execution. To give some appearance of an
intention to enforce it, he, in the month of October, 1613, while the
Earl of Sutherland, his brothers and nephews, were absent from the
country, made a demonstration of invading Sutherland or Strathnaver,
by collecting his forces at a particular point, and bringing thither
some pieces of ordnance from Castle Sinclair. The Earl of Sutherland,
having arrived in Sutherland while the Earl of Caithness was thus
employed, immediately assembled some of his countrymen, and,
along with his brother Sir Alexander, went to the marches between
Sutherland and Caithness, near the height of Strathully, where they
waited the approach of the Earl of Caithness. Here they were joined
by Mackay, who had given notice of the Earl of Caithness’s movements
to the lairds of Foulis, Balnagown, and Assynt, the sheriff of
Cromarty, and the tutor of Kintail, all of whom prepared themselves
to assist the Earl of Sutherland. The Earl of Caithness, however, by
advice of his brother, Sir John Sinclair, returned home and disbanded
his force.
To prevent the Earl of Caithness from attempting any farther
interference with the Privy Council, either in the way of intrigue
or intimidation, Sir Robert Gordon obtained a remission and pardon
from the king, in the month of December, 1613, to his nephew, Donald
Mackay, John Gordon, younger of Embo, John Gordon in Broray, Adam
Gordon Georgeson, and their accomplices, for the slaughter of John
Sinclair of Stirkage at Thurso. However, Sir Gideon Murray, Deputy
Treasurer for Scotland, contrived to prevent the pardon passing
through the seals till the beginning of the year 1616.
The Earl of Caithness, being thus baffled in his designs against the
Earl of Sutherland and his friends, fell upon a device which never
failed to succeed in times of religious intolerance and persecution.
Unfortunately for mankind and for the interests of Christianity,
the principles of religious toleration, involving the inalienable
right of every man to worship God according to the dictates of his
conscience, have been till of late but little understood, and at the
period in question, and for upwards of one hundred and sixty years
thereafter, the statute book of Scotland was disgraced by penal
enactments against the Catholics, almost unparalleled for their
sanguinary atrocity. By an act of the first parliament of James
VI., any Catholic who assisted at the offices of his religion was,
“for the first fault,” that is, for following the dictates of his
conscience, to suffer confiscation of all his goods, movable and
immovable, personal and real; for the second, banishment; and death
for the third fault! But the law was not confined to overt acts
only--the mere suspicion of being a Catholic placed the suspected
person out of the pale and protection of the law; for if, on being
warned by the bishops and ministers, he did not recant and give
confession of his faith according to the approved form, he was
excommunicated, and declared infamous and incapable to sit or stand
in judgment, pursue or bear office.[205]
Under this last-mentioned law the Earl of Caithness now sought
to gratify his vengeance against the Earl of Sutherland. Having
represented to the Archbishop of St. Andrews and the clergy of
Scotland that the Earl of Sutherland was at heart a Catholic,
he prevailed upon the bishops--with little difficulty, it is
supposed--to acquaint the king thereof. His majesty thereupon issued
a warrant against the Earl of Sutherland, who was in consequence
apprehended and imprisoned at St. Andrews. The earl applied to the
bishops for a month’s delay, till the 15th February, 1614, promising
that before that time he would either give the church satisfaction
or surrender himself; but his application was refused by the high
commission of Scotland. Sir Alexander Gordon, the brother of the
earl, being then in Edinburgh, immediately gave notice to his
brother, Sir Robert Gordon, who was at the time in London, of the
proceedings against their brother, the earl. Sir Robert having
applied to his majesty for the release of the earl for a time, that
he might make up his mind on the subject of religion, and look after
his affairs in the north, his majesty granted a warrant for his
liberation till the month of August following. On the expiration of
the time, he returned to his confinement at St. Andrews, from which
he was removed, on his own application, to the abbey of Holyrood
house, where he remained till the month of March, 1615, when he
obtained leave to go home, “having,” says Sir Robert Gordon, “in some
measure satisfied the church concerning his religion.”
The Earl of Caithness, thus again defeated in his views, tried,
as a _dernier ressort_, to disjoin the families of Sutherland and
Mackay. Sometimes he attempted to prevail upon the Marquis of Huntly
to persuade the Earl of Sutherland and his brothers to come to an
arrangement altogether independent of Mackay; and at other times he
endeavoured to persuade Mackay, by holding out certain inducements
to him, to compromise their differences without including the Earl
of Sutherland in the arrangement; but he completely failed in these
attempts.[206]
In 1614-15 a formidable rebellion broke out in the South Hebrides,
arising from the efforts made by the clan Donald of Islay to retain
that island in their possession. The castle of Dunyveg in Islay,
which, for three years previous to 1614, had been in possession of
the Bishop of the Isles, having been taken by Angus Oig, younger
brother of Sir James Macdonald of Islay, from Ranald Oig, who had
surprised it, the former refused to restore it to the bishop. The
Privy Council took the matter in hand, and, having accepted from
John Campbell of Calder an offer of a feu-duty or perpetual rent for
Islay, they prevailed on him to accept a commission against Angus
Oig and his followers. The clan Donald, who viewed with suspicion
the growing power of the Campbells, looked upon this project with
much dislike, and treated certain hostages left by the bishop with
great severity. Even the bishop remonstrated against making “the
name of Campbell greater in the Isles than they are already,”
thinking it neither good nor profitable to his majesty, “to root
out one pestiferous clan, and plant in another little better.” The
remonstrance of the bishop and an offer made to put matters right
by Sir James Macdonald, who was then imprisoned in Edinburgh castle,
were alike unheeded, and Campbell of Calder received his commission
of Lieutenandry against Angus Oig Macdonald, Coll Mac-Gillespic, and
the other rebels of Islay. A free pardon was offered to all who were
not concerned in the taking of the castle, and a remission to Angus
Oig, provided he gave up the castle, the hostages, and two associates
of his own rank.
While Campbell was collecting his forces, and certain auxiliary
troops from Ireland were preparing to embark, the chancellor of
Scotland, the Earl of Dunfermline, by means of a Ross-shire man,
named George Graham of Eryne, prevailed on Angus Oig to release the
bishop’s hostages, and deliver up to Graham the castle, in behalf of
the chancellor. Graham re-delivered the castle to Angus, to be held
by him as the regular constable, until he should receive further
order from the chancellor, and at the same time assured Angus of the
chancellor’s countenance and protection, enjoining him to resist
all efforts on the part of Campbell or his friends to eject him.
These injunctions Graham’s dupes too readily followed. “There can
be no doubt whatever that the chancellor was the author of this
notable plan to procure the liberation of the hostages, and at the
same time to deprive the clan Donald of the benefit of the pardon
promised to them on this account. There are grounds for a suspicion
that the chancellor himself desired to obtain Islay; although it is
probable that he wished to avoid the odium attendant on the more
violent measures required to render such an acquisition available.
He, therefore, contrived so as to leave the punishment of the clan
Donald to the Campbells, who were already sufficiently obnoxious to
the western clans, whilst he himself had the credit of procuring the
liberation of the hostages.”
[Illustration: Dunyveg Castle, Islay.--From a drawing taken expressly
for this work.]
Campbell of Calder and Sir Oliver Lambert, commander of the Irish
forces, did not effect a junction till the 5th of January, 1615, and
on the 6th, Campbell landed on Islay with 200 men, his force being
augmented next day by 140 more. Several of the rebels, alarmed,
deserted Angus, and were pardoned on condition of helping the
besiegers. Ronald Mac-James, uncle of Angus Oig, surrendered a fort
on the island of Lochgorme which he commanded, on the 21st, and
along with his son received a conditional assurance of his majesty’s
favour. Operations were commenced against Dunyveg on February 1st,
and shortly after Angus had an interview with the lieutenant, during
which the latter showed that Angus had been deceived by Graham,
upon which he promised to surrender. On returning to the castle,
however, he refused to implement his promise, being instigated to
hold out apparently by Coll Mac-Gillespic. After being again battered
for some time, Angus and some of his followers at last surrendered
unconditionally, Coll Mac-Gillespic contriving to make his escape.
Campbell took possession of the castle on the 3d February, dispersed
the forces of the rebels, and put to death a number of those who had
deserted the siege; Angus himself was reserved for examination by the
Privy Council. In the course of the examination it came out clearly
that the Earl of Argyle was the original promoter of the seizure of
the castle, his purpose apparently being to ruin the clan Donald by
urging them to rebellion; but this charge, as well as that against
the Earl of Dunfermline, appears to have been smothered.
During the early part of the year 1615, Coll Mac-Gillespic and others
of the clan Donald who had escaped, infested the western coasts, and
committed many acts of piracy, being joined about the month of May by
Sir James Macdonald, who had escaped from Edinburgh castle, where he
had been lying for a long time under sentence of death. Sir James and
his followers, now numbering several hundreds, after laying in a good
supply of provisions, sailed towards Islay. The Privy Council were
not slow in taking steps to repress the rebellion, although various
circumstances occurred to thwart their intentions. Calder engaged to
keep the castle of Dunyveg against the rebels, and instructions were
given to the various western gentlemen friendly to the government to
defend the western coasts and islands. Large rewards were offered for
the principal rebels. All the forces were enjoined to be at their
appointed stations by the 6th of July, furnished with forty days’
provisions, and with a sufficient number of boats, to enable them to
act by sea, if necessary.
Sir James Macdonald, about the end of June, landing on Islay, managed
by stratagem to obtain possession of Dunyveg Castle, himself and
his followers appearing to have conducted themselves with great
moderation. Dividing his force, which numbered about 400, into two
bodies, with one of which he himself intended to proceed to Jura,
the other, under Coll Mac-Gillespic, was destined for Kintyre, for
the purpose of encouraging the ancient followers of his family to
assist him. In the beginning of July, Angus Oig and a number of his
followers were tried and condemned, and executed immediately after.
Various disheartening reports were now circulated as to the
disaffection of Donald Gorme of Sleat, captain of the clan Ranald,
Ruari Macleod of Harris, and others; and that Hector Maclean of
Dowart, if not actually engaged in the rebellion, had announced, that
if he was desired to proceed against the clan Donald, he would not be
very earnest in the service. The militia of Ayr, Renfrew, Dumbarton,
Bute, and Inverness were called out, and a commission was granted to
the Marquis of Hamilton to keep the clan Donald out of Arran.
The Privy Council had some time before this urged the king to send
down the Earl of Argyle from England--to which he had fled from
his numerous creditors--to act as lieutenant in suppressing the
insurrection. After many delays, Argyle, to whom full powers had been
given to act as lieutenant, at length mustered his forces at Duntroon
on Loch Crinan early in September. He issued a proclamation of pardon
to all rebels who were willing to submit, and by means of spies
examined Macdonald’s camp, which had been pitched on the west coast
of Kintyre, the number of the rebels being ascertained to be about
1,000 men. Argyle set himself so promptly and vigorously to crush the
rebels, that Sir James Macdonald, who had been followed to Islay by
the former, finding it impossible either to resist the Lieutenant’s
forces, or to escape with his galleys to the north isles, desired
from the earl a truce of four days, promising at the end of that
time to surrender. Argyle would not accede to this request except on
condition of Sir James giving up the two forts which he held; this
Sir James urged Coll Mac-Gillespic to do, but he refused, although
he sent secretly to Argyle a message that he was willing to comply
with the earl’s request. Argyle immediately sent a force against Sir
James to surprise him, who, being warned of this by the natives,
managed to make his escape to an island called Inchdaholl, on the
coast of Ireland, and never again returned to the Hebrides. Next
day, Mac-Gillespic surrendered the two forts and his prisoners, upon
assurance of his own life and the lives of a few of his followers,
at the same time treacherously apprehending and delivering to Argyle,
Macfie of Colonsay, one of the principal rebel leaders, and eighteen
others. This conduct soon had many imitators, including Macfie
himself.
Having delivered the forts in Islay to Campbell of Calder, and
having executed a number of the leading rebels, Argyle proceeded
to Kintyre, and crushed out all remaining seeds of insurrection
there. Many of the principal rebels, notwithstanding a diligent
search, effected their escape, many of them to Ireland, Sir James
Macdonald being sent to Spain by some Jesuits in Galway. The escape
of so many of the principal rebels seems to have given the Council
great dissatisfaction. Argyle carried on operations till the middle
of December 1615, refusing to dismiss the hired soldiers in the
beginning of November, as he was ordered by the Council to do. He was
compelled to disburse the pay, amounting to upwards of £7,000, for
the extra month and a half out of his own pocket.
“Thus,” to use the words of our authority for the above details,[207]
“terminated the last struggle of the once powerful clan Donald of
Islay and Kintyre, to retain, from the grasp of the Campbells, these
ancient possessions of their tribe.”
Ever since the death of John Sinclair at Thurso, the Earl of
Caithness used every means in his power to induce such of his
countrymen as were daring enough, to show their prowess and
dexterity, by making incursions into Sutherland or Strathnaver,
for the purpose of annoying the vassals and dependants of the
Earl of Sutherland and his ally, Mackay. Amongst others he often
communicated on this subject with William Kennethson, whose father,
Kenneth Buidhe, had always been the principal instrument in the
hands of Earl George in oppressing the people of his own country.
For the furtherance of his plans he at last prevailed upon William,
who already stood rebel to the king in a criminal cause, to go into
voluntary banishment into Strathnaver, and put himself under the
protection of Mackay, to whom he was to pretend that he had left
Caithness to avoid any solicitations from the Earl of Caithness to
injure the inhabitants of Strathnaver. To cover their designs they
caused a report to be spread that William Mac-Kenneth was to leave
Caithness because he would not obey the orders of the earl to execute
some designs against Sir Robert Gordon, the tutor of Sutherland, and
Mackay, and when this false rumour had been sufficiently spread,
Mac-Kenneth, and his brother John, and their dependants, fled into
Strathnaver and solicited the favour and protection of Mackay.
The latter received them kindly; but as William and his party had
been long addicted to robbery and theft, he strongly advised them
to abstain from such practices in all time coming; and that they
might not afterwards plead necessity as an excuse for continuing
their depredations, he allotted them some lands to dwell on. After
staying a month or two in Strathnaver, during which time they stole
some cattle and horses out of Caithness, William received a private
visit by night from Kenneth Buidhe, his father, who had been sent by
the Earl of Caithness for the purpose of executing a contemplated
depredation in Sutherland. Mackay was then in Sutherland on a visit
to his uncle, Sir Robert Gordon, which being known to William
Mac-Kenneth, he resolved to enter Sutherland with his party, and
carry off into Caithness all the booty they could collect. Being
observed in the glen of Loth by some of the clan Gun, collecting
cattle and horses, they were immediately apprehended, with the
exception of Iain-Garbh-Mac-Chonald-Mac-Mhurchidh-Mhoir, who, being
a very resolute man, refused to surrender, and was in consequence
killed. The prisoners were delivered to Sir Robert Gordon at Dornoch,
who committed William and his brother John to the castle of Dornoch
for trial. In the meantime two of the principal men of Mac-Kenneth’s
party were tried, convicted, and executed, and the remainder were
allowed to return home on giving surety to keep the peace. This
occurrence took place in the month of January 1616.
The Earl of Caithness now finished his restless career of iniquity
by the perpetration of a crime which, though trivial in its
consequences, was of so highly a penal nature in itself as to bring
his own life into jeopardy. As the circumstances which led to the
burning of the corn of William Innes, a servant of Lord Forbes at
Sanset in Caithness, and the discovery of the Earl of Caithness as
instigator, are somewhat curious, it is thought that a recital of
them may not be here out of place.
Among other persons who had suffered at the hands of the earl was
his own kinsman, William Sinclair of Dumbaith. After annoying him
in a variety of ways, the earl instigated his bastard brother,
Henry Sinclair, and Kenneth Buidhe, to destroy and lay waste part
of Dumbaith’s lands, who, unable to resist, and being in dread of
personal risk, locked himself up in his house at Dunray, which they
besieged. William Sinclair immediately applied to John, Earl of
Sutherland, for assistance, who sent his friend Mackay with a party
to rescue Sinclair from his perilous situation. Mackay succeeded, and
carried Sinclair along with him into Sutherland, where he remained
for a time, but he afterwards went to reside in Moray, where he died.
Although thus cruelly persecuted and forced to become an exile from
his country by the Earl of Caithness, no entreaties could induce
him to apply for redress, choosing rather to suffer himself than to
see his relative punished. William Sinclair was succeeded by his
grandson, George Sinclair, who married a sister of Lord Forbes. By
the persuasion of his wife, who was a mere tool in the hands of the
Earl of Caithness, George Sinclair was induced to execute a deed of
entail, by which, failing of heirs male of his own body, he left the
whole of his lands to the earl. When the earl had obtained this deed
he began to devise means to make away with Sinclair, and actually
persuaded Sinclair’s wife to assist him in this nefarious design.
Having obtained notice of this conspiracy against his life, Sinclair
left Caithness and took up his residence with his brother-in-law,
Lord Forbes, who received him with great kindness and hospitality,
and reprobated very strongly the wicked conduct of his sister.
Sinclair now recalled the entail in favour of the Earl of Caithness,
and made a new deed by which he conveyed his whole estate to Lord
Forbes. George Sinclair died soon after the execution of the deed,
and having left no issue, Lord Forbes took possession of his lands of
Dunray and Dumbaith.
Disappointed in his plans to acquire Sinclair’s property, the Earl
of Caithness seized every opportunity of annoying Lord Forbes in
his possessions, by oppressing his tenants and servants, in every
possible way, under the pretence of discharging his duty as sheriff,
to which office he had been appointed by the Earl of Huntly, on
occasion of his marriage with Huntly’s sister. Complaints were made
from time to time against the earl, on account of these proceedings,
to the Privy Council of Scotland, which, in some measure, afforded
redress; but to protect his tenants more effectually, Lord Forbes
took up a temporary residence in Caithness, relying upon the aid of
the house of Sutherland in case of need.
As the Earl of Caithness was aware that any direct attack on Lord
Forbes would be properly resented, and as any enterprise undertaken
by his own people would be laid to his charge, however cautious
he might be in dealing with them, he fixed on the clan Gun as the
fittest instruments for effecting his designs against Lord Forbes.
Besides being the most resolute men in Caithness, always ready to
undertake any desperate action, they depended more upon the Earl of
Sutherland and Mackay, from whom they held some lands, than upon
the Earl of Caithness; a circumstance which the latter supposed,
should the contemplated outrages of the clan Gun ever become matter
of inquiry, might throw the suspicion upon the two former as the
silent instigators. Accordingly, the earl opened a negotiation with
John Gun, chief of the clan Gun in Caithness, and with his brother,
Alexander Gun, whose father he had hanged in the year 1586. In
consequence of an invitation, the two brothers, along with Alexander
Gun, their cousin-german, repaired to Castle Sinclair, where they
met the earl. The earl did not at first divulge his plans to all the
party; but taking Alexander Gun, the cousin, aside, he pointed out
to him the injury he alleged he had sustained, in consequence of
Lord Forbes having obtained a footing in Caithness,--that he could
no longer submit to the indignity shown him by a stranger,--that he
had made choice of him (Gun) to undertake a piece of service for
him, on performing which, he would reward him most amply; and to
secure compliance, the earl desired him to remember the many favours
he had already received from him, and how well he had treated him,
promising, at the same time, to show him even greater kindness in
time coming. Alexander thereupon promised to serve the earl, though
at the hazard of his life; but upon being interrogated by the earl
whether he would undertake to burn the corn of Sanset, belonging
to William Innes, a servant of Lord Forbes, Gun, who had never
imagined that he was to be employed in such an ignoble affair,
expressed the greatest astonishment at the proposal, and refused,
in the most peremptory and indignant manner, to undertake its
execution; yet, to satisfy the earl, he told him that he would, at
his command, undertake to assassinate William Innes,--an action which
he considered less criminal and dishonourable, and more becoming a
gentleman, than burning a quantity of corn! Finding him obdurate, the
earl enjoined him to secrecy.
The earl next applied to the two brothers, John and Alexander,
with whom he did not find it so difficult to treat. They at first
hesitated with some firmness in undertaking the business on which the
earl was so intent; and they pleaded an excuse, by saying, that as
justice was then more strictly executed in Scotland than formerly,
they could not expect to escape, as they had no place of safety to
retreat to after the crime was committed; as a proof of which they
instanced the cases of the clan Donald and the clan Gregor, two races
of people much more powerful than the clan Gun, who had been brought
to the brink of ruin, and almost annihilated, under the authority
of the laws. The earl replied, that as soon as they should perform
the service for him he would send them to the western isles, to
some of his acquaintances and friends, with whom they might remain
till Lord Forbes and he were reconciled, when he would obtain their
pardon; that in the meantime he would profess, in public, to be their
enemy, but that he would be their friend secretly, and permit them to
frequent Caithness without danger. Alexander Gun, overcome at last by
the entreaties of the earl, reluctantly consented to his request, and
going into Sanset, in the dead of night, with two accomplices, set
fire to all the corn stacks which were in the barn-yard, belonging to
William Innes, and which were in consequence consumed. This affair
occurred in the month of November, 1615. The Earl of Caithness
immediately spread a report through the whole country that Mackay’s
tenants had committed this outrage, but the deception was of short
duration.
It may be here noticed that John, sixth Earl of Sutherland, died in
September, 1615, and was succeeded by his eldest son, John, a boy six
years old, to whom Sir Robert Gordon, his uncle, was appointed tutor.
Sir Robert Gordon, having arrived in the north of Scotland, from
England, in the month of December following, resolved to probe the
matter to the bottom, not merely on account of his nephew, Mackay,
whose men were suspected, but to satisfy Lord Forbes, who was now on
friendly terms with the house of Sutherland; but the discovery of the
perpetrators soon became an easy task, in consequence of a quarrel
among the clan Gun themselves, the members of which upbraided one
another as the authors of the fire-raising. Alexander Gun, the cousin
of Alexander Gun, the real criminal, thereupon fled from Caithness,
and sent some of his friends to Sir Robert Gordon and Donald Mackay
with these proposals:--that if they would receive him into favour,
and secure him from danger, he would confess the whole circumstances,
and reveal the authors of the conflagration, and that he would
declare the whole before the Privy Council if required. On receiving
this proposal, Sir Robert Gordon appointed Alexander Gun to meet him
privately at Helmsdale, in the house of Sir Alexander Gordon, brother
of Sir Robert. A meeting was accordingly held at the place appointed,
at which Sir Robert and his friends agreed to do everything in their
power to preserve Gun’s life; and Mackay promised, moreover, to give
him a possession in Strathie, where his father had formerly lived.
When the Earl of Caithness heard of Alexander Gun’s flight into
Sutherland he became greatly alarmed lest Alexander should reveal
the affair of Sanset; and anticipating such a result, the earl gave
out everywhere that Sir Robert Gordon, Mackay, and Sir Alexander
Gordon, had hired some of the clan Gun to accuse him of having
burnt William Innes’s corn. But this artifice was of no avail, for
as soon as Lord Forbes received notice from Sir Robert Gordon of the
circumstances related by Alexander Gun, he immediately cited John
Gun and his brother Alexander, and their accomplices, to appear for
trial at Edinburgh, on the 2d April, 1616, to answer to the charge
of burning the corn at Sanset; and he also summoned the Earl of
Caithness, as sheriff of that county, to deliver them up for trial.
John Gun, thinking that the best course he could pursue under present
circumstances was to follow the example of his cousin, Alexander,
sent a message to Sir Alexander Gordon, desiring an interview with
him, which being granted, they met at Navidale. John Gun then offered
to reveal everything he knew concerning the fire, on condition that
his life should be spared; but Sir Alexander observed that he could
come under no engagement, as he was uncertain how the king and the
council might view such a proceeding; but he promised, that as John
had not been an actor in the business, but a witness only to the
arrangement between his brother and the Earl of Caithness, he would
do what he could to save him, if he went to Edinburgh in compliance
with the summons.
In this state of matters, the Earl of Caithness wrote to the Marquis
of Huntly, accusing Sir Robert Gordon and Mackay of a design to
bring him within the reach of the law of treason, and to injure
the honour of his house by slandering him with the burning of the
corn at Sanset. The other party told the marquis that they could
not refuse to assist Lord Forbes in finding out the persons who had
burned the corn at Sanset, but that they had never imagined that
the earl would have acted so base a part as to become an accomplice
in such a criminal act; and farther, that as Mackay’s men were
challenged with the deed, they certainly were entitled at least to
clear Mackay’s people from the charge by endeavouring to find out
the malefactors,--in all which they considered they had done the
earl no wrong. The Marquis of Huntly did not fail to write the Earl
of Caithness the answer he had received from Sir Robert Gordon and
Mackay, which grieved him exceedingly, as he was too well aware of
the consequences which would follow if the prosecution of the Guns
was persevered in.
At the time appointed for the trial of the Guns, Sir Robert Gordon,
Mackay, and Lord Forbes, with all his friends, went to Edinburgh, and
upon their arrival they entreated the council to prevent a remission
in favour of the Earl of Caithness from passing the signet until the
affair in hand was tried; a request with which the council complied.
The Earl of Caithness did not appear; but he sent his son, Lord
Berridale, to Edinburgh, along with John Gun and all those persons
who had been summoned by Lord Forbes, with the exception of Alexander
Gun and his two accomplices. He alleged as his reason for not sending
them that they were not his men, being Mackay’s own tenants, and
dwelling in Dilred, the property of Mackay, which was held by him
off the Earl of Sutherland, who, he alleged, was bound to present
the three persons alluded to. But the lords of the council would
not admit of this excuse, and again required Lord Berridale and his
father to present the three culprits before the court on the 10th
June following, because, although they had possessions in Dilred,
they had also lands from the Earl of Caithness on which they usually
resided. Besides, the deed was committed in Caithness, of which the
earl was sheriff, on which account also he was bound to apprehend
them. Lord Berridale, whose character was quite the reverse of that
of his father, apprehensive of the consequences of a trial, now
offered satisfaction in his father’s name to Lord Forbes if he would
stop the prosecution; but his lordship refused to do anything without
the previous advice and consent of Sir Robert Gordon and Mackay,
who, upon being consulted, caused articles of agreement to be drawn
up, which were presented to Lord Berridale by neutral persons for
his acceptance. He, however, considering the conditions sought to be
imposed upon his father too hard, rejected them.
In consequence of the refusal of Lord Berridale to accede to the
terms proposed, John Gun was apprehended by one of the magistrates
of Edinburgh, on the application of Lord Forbes, and committed a
prisoner to the jail of that city. Gun thereupon requested to see Sir
Robert Gordon and Mackay, whom he entreated to use their influence
to procure him his liberty, promising to declare everything he knew
of the business for which he was prosecuted before the lords of the
council. Sir Robert Gordon and Mackay then deliberated with Lord
Forbes and Lord Elphinston on the subject, and they all four promised
faithfully to Gun to do everything in their power to save him, and
that they would thenceforth maintain and defend him and his cousin,
Alexander Gun, against the Earl of Caithness or any person, as long
as they had reason and equity on their side; besides which, Mackay
promised him a liferent lease of the lands in Strathie to compensate
for his possessions in Caithness, of which he would, of course,
be deprived by the earl for revealing the latter’s connexion with
the fire-raising at Sanset. John Gun was accordingly examined the
following day by the lords of the council, when he confessed that the
Earl of Caithness made his brother, Alexander Gun, burn the corn of
Sanset, and that the affair had been proposed and discussed in his
presence. Alexander Gun, the cousin, was examined also at the same
time, and stated the same circumstances precisely as John Gun had
done. After examination, John and Alexander were again committed to
prison.
As neither the Earl of Caithness nor his son, Lord Berridale,
complied with the commands of the council to deliver up Alexander Gun
and his accomplices in the month of June, they were both outlawed
and denounced rebels; and were summoned and charged by Lord Forbes
to appear personally at Edinburgh in the month of July immediately
following, to answer to the charge of causing the corn of Sanset
to be burnt. This fixed determination on the part of Lord Forbes
to bring the earl and his son to trial had the effect of altering
their tone, and they now earnestly entreated him and Mackay to agree
to a reconciliation on any terms; but they declined to enter into
any arrangement until they had consulted Sir Robert Gordon. After
obtaining Sir Robert’s consent, and a written statement of the
conditions which he required from the Earl of Caithness in behalf of
his nephew, the Earl of Sutherland, the parties entered into a final
agreement in the month of July, 1616. The principal heads of the
contract, which was afterwards recorded in the books of council and
session, were as follows:--That all civil actions between the parties
should be settled by the mediation of common friends,--that the Earl
of Caithness and his son should pay to Lord Forbes and Mackay the
sum of 20,000 merks Scots money,--that all quarrels and criminal
actions should be mutually forgiven, and particularly, that the
Earl of Caithness and all his friends should forgive and remit the
slaughter at Thurso--that the Earl of Caithness and his son should
renounce for themselves and their heirs all jurisdiction, criminal or
civil, within Sutherland or Strathnaver, and any other jurisdiction
which they should thereafter happen to acquire over any lands lying
within the diocese of Caithness then pertaining, or which should
afterwards belong, to the Earl of Sutherland, or his heirs,--that the
Earl of Caithness should deliver Alexander Gun and his accomplices to
Lord Forbes,--that the earl, his son, and their heirs, should never
thenceforth contend with the Earl of Sutherland for precedency in
parliament or priority of place,--that the Earl of Caithness and his
son, their friends and tenants, should keep the peace in time coming,
under the penalty of great sums of money, and should never molest nor
trouble the tenants of the Earl of Sutherland and Lord Forbes,--that
the Earl of Caithness, his son, or their friends, should not receive
nor harbour any fugitives from Sutherland or Strathnaver,--and that
there should be good friendship and amity kept amongst them in all
time to come.
In consequence of this agreement, the two sons of Kenneth Buy,
William and John before-mentioned, were delivered to Lord Berridale,
who gave security for their keeping the peace; and John Gun and
Alexander his cousin were released, and delivered to Lord Forbes
and Mackay, who gave surety to the lords of the council to present
them for trial whenever required; and as the Earl of Caithness had
deprived them of their possessions in Caithness on account of the
discovery they had made, Mackay, who had lately been knighted by the
king, gave them lands in Strathnaver as he had promised. Matters
being thus settled, Lord Berridale presented himself before the court
at Edinburgh to abide his trial; but no person of course appearing
against him, the trial was postponed. The Earl of Caithness, however,
failing to appear, the diet against him was continued till the 28th
of August following.
Although the king was well pleased, on account of the peace which
such an adjustment would produce in his northern dominions, with
the agreement which had been entered into, and the proceedings
which followed thereon, all of which were made known to him by the
Privy Council; yet, as the passing over such a flagrant act as
wilful fire-raising, without punishment, might prove pernicious, he
wrote a letter to the Privy Council of Scotland, commanding them to
prosecute, with all severity, those who were guilty of, or accessory
to, the crime. Lord Berridale was thereupon apprehended on suspicion,
and committed a prisoner to the castle of Edinburgh; and his father,
perceiving the determination of the king to prosecute the authors of
the fire, again declined to appear for trial on the appointed day,
on which account he was again outlawed, and declared a rebel as the
guilty author.
In this extremity Lord Berridale had recourse to Sir Robert Gordon,
then resident at court, for his aid. He wrote him a letter,
entreating him that, as all controversies were now settled, he
would, in place of an enemy become a faithful friend,--that for his
own part, he, Lord Berridale, had been always innocent of the jars
and dissensions which had happened between the two families,--that
he was also innocent of the crime of which he was charged,--and
that he wished his majesty to be informed by Sir Robert of these
circumstances, hoping that he would order him to be released from
confinement. Sir Robert answered, that he had long desired a
perfect agreement between the houses of Sutherland and Caithness,
which he would endeavour to maintain during his administration in
Sutherland,--that he would intercede with the king in behalf of his
lordship to the utmost of his power,--that all disputes being now
at an end, he would be his faithful friend,--that he had a very
different opinion of his disposition from that he entertained of his
father, the earl; and he concluded by entreating him to be careful to
preserve the friendship which had been now commenced between them.
As the king understood that Lord Berridale was supposed to be
innocent of the crime with which he and his father stood charged,
and as he could not, without a verdict against Berridale, proceed
against the family of Caithness by forfeiture, in consequence of his
lordship having been infeft many years before in his father’s estate,
his majesty, on the earnest entreaty of the then bishop of Ross, Sir
Robert Gordon, and Sir James Spence of Wormistoun, was pleased to
remit and forgive the crime on the following conditions:--1st. That
the Earl of Caithness and his son should give satisfaction to their
creditors, who were constantly annoying his majesty with clamours
against the earl, and craving justice at his hands. 2d. That the
Earl of Caithness, with consent of Lord Berridale, should freely
renounce and resign perpetually, into the hands of his majesty, the
heritable sheriffship and justiciary of Caithness. 3d. That the Earl
of Caithness should deliver the three criminals who had burnt the
corn, that public justice might be satisfied upon them, as a terror
and example to others. 4th. That the Earl of Caithness, with consent
of Lord Berridale, should give and resign _in perpetuum_ to the
bishop of Caithness, the house of Strabister, with as many of the
feu lands of that bishopric as should amount to the yearly value of
two thousand merks Scots money, for the purpose of augmenting the
income of the bishop, which was at that time small in consequence
of the greater part of his lands being in the hands of the earl.
Commissioners were sent down from London to Caithness in October
1616, to see that these conditions were complied with. The second and
last conditions were immediately implemented; and as the earl and
his son promised to give satisfaction to their creditors, and to do
everything in their power to apprehend the burners of the corn, the
latter was released from the castle of Edinburgh, and directions were
given for drawing up a remission and pardon to the Earl of Caithness.
Lord Berridale, however, had scarcely been released from the castle,
when he was again imprisoned within the jail of Edinburgh, at the
instance of Sir James Home of Cowdenknowes, his cousin german, who
had become surety for him and his father to their creditors for
large sums of money. The earl himself narrowly escaped the fate of
his son and retired to Caithness, but his creditors had sufficient
interest to prevent his remission from passing till they should be
satisfied. With consent of the creditors the council of Scotland
gave him a personal protection, from time to time, to enable him to
come to Edinburgh for the purpose of settling with them, but he made
no arrangement, and returned privately into Caithness before the
expiration of the _supersedere_ which had been granted him, leaving
his son to suffer all the miseries of a prison. After enduring a
captivity of five years, Lord Berridale was released from prison
by the good offices of the Earl of Enzie, and put, for behoof of
himself, and his own and his father’s creditors, in possession of
the family estates from which his father was driven by Sir Robert
Gordon acting under a royal warrant, a just punishment for the many
enormities of a long and misspent life.[208]
Desperate as the fortunes of the Earl of Caithness were even previous
to the disposal of his estates, he most unexpectedly found an ally
in Sir Donald Mackay, who had taken offence at Sir Robert Gordon,
and who, being a man of quick resolution and of an inconstant
disposition, determined to forsake the house of Sutherland, and to
ingratiate himself with the Earl of Caithness. He alleged various
causes of discontent as a reason for his conduct, one of the chief
being connected with pecuniary considerations; for having, as he
alleged, burdened his estates with debts incurred for some years
past in following the house of Sutherland, he thought that, in time
coming, he might, by procuring the favour of the Earl of Caithness,
turn the same to his own advantage and that of his countrymen.
Moreover, as he had been induced to his own prejudice to grant
certain life-rent tacks of the lands of Strathie and Dilred to John
and Alexander Gun, and others of the clan Gun for revealing the
affair of Sanset, he thought that by joining the Earl of Caithness,
these might be destroyed, by which means he would get back his lands
which he meant to convey to his brother, John Mackay, as a portion;
and he, moreover, expected that the earl would give him and his
countrymen some possessions in Caithness. But the chief ground of
discontent on the part of Sir Donald Mackay was an action brought
against him and Lord Forbes before the court of session, to recover
a contract entered into between the last Earl of Sutherland and
Mackay, in the year 1613, relative to their marches and other matters
of controversy, which being considered by Mackay as prejudicial to
him, he had endeavoured to get destroyed through the agency of some
persons about Lord Forbes, into whose keeping the deed had been
intrusted.
After brooding over these subjects of discontent for some years,
Mackay, in the year 1618, suddenly resolved to break with the house
of Sutherland, and to form an alliance with the Earl of Caithness,
who had long borne a mortal enmity at that family. Accordingly,
Mackay sent John Sutherland, his cousin-german, into Caithness to
request a private conference with the earl in any part of Caithness
he might appoint. This offer was too tempting to be rejected by the
earl, who expected, by a reconciliation with Sir Donald Mackay, to
turn the same to his own personal gratification and advantage. In the
first place, he hoped to revenge himself upon the clan Gun, who were
his principal enemies, and upon Sir Donald himself, by detaching him
from his superior, the Earl of Sutherland, and from the friendship
of his uncles, who had always supported him in all his difficulties.
In the second place, he expected that, by alienating Mackay from the
duty and affection he owed the house of Sutherland, that he would
weaken his power and influence. And lastly, he trusted that Mackay
would not only be prevailed upon to discharge his own part, but would
also persuade Lord Forbes to discharge his share of the sum of 20,000
merks Scots, which he and his son, Lord Berridale, had become bound
to pay them, on account of the burning at Sanset.
The Earl of Caithness having at once agreed to Mackay’s proposal, a
meeting was held by appointment in the neighbourhood of Dunray, in
the parish of Reay, in Caithness. The parties met in the night-time,
accompanied each by three men only. After much discussion, and
various conferences, which were continued for two or three days,
they resolved to destroy the clan Gun, and particularly John Gun,
and Alexander his cousin. To please the earl, Mackay undertook to
despatch these last, as they were obnoxious to him, on account of
the part they had taken against him, in revealing the burning at
Sanset. They persuaded themselves that the house of Sutherland would
defend the clan, as they were bound to do by their promise, and that
that house would be thus drawn into some snare. To confirm their
friendship, the earl and Mackay arranged that John Mackay, the only
brother of Sir Donald, should marry a niece of the earl, a daughter
of James Sinclair of Murkle, who was a mortal enemy of all the clan
Gun. Having thus planned the line of conduct they were to follow,
they parted, after swearing to continue in perpetual friendship.
Notwithstanding the private way in which the meeting was held,
accounts of it immediately spread through the kingdom; and every
person wondered at the motives which could induce Sir Donald Mackay
to take such a step so unadvisedly, without the knowledge of his
uncles, Sir Robert and Sir Alexander Gordon, or of Lord Forbes. The
clan Gun receiving secret intelligence of the design upon them, from
different friendly quarters, retired into Sutherland. The clan were
astonished at Mackay’s conduct, as he had promised, at Edinburgh, in
presence of Lords Forbes and Elphingston and Sir Robert Gordon, in
the year 1616, to be a perpetual friend to them, and chiefly to John
Gun and to his cousin Alexander.
After Mackay returned from Caithness, he sent his cousin-german,
Angus Mackay of Bighouse, to Sutherland, to acquaint his uncles,
who had received notice of the meeting, that his object in meeting
the Earl of Caithness was for his own personal benefit, and that
nothing had been done to their prejudice. Angus Mackay met Sir Robert
Gordon at Dunrobin, to whom he delivered his kinsman’s message,
which, he said, he hoped Sir Robert would take in good part, adding
that Sir Donald would show, in presence of both his uncles, that
the clan Gun had failed in duty and fidelity to him and the house
of Sutherland, since they had revealed the burning; and therefore,
that if his uncles would not forsake John Gun, and some others
of the clan, he would adhere to them no longer. Sir Robert Gordon
returned a verbal answer by Angus Mackay, that when Sir Donald came
in person to Dunrobin to clear himself, as in duty he was bound to
do, he would then accept of his excuse, and not till then. And he
at the same time wrote a letter to Sir Donald, to the effect that
for his own (Sir Robert’s) part, he did not much regard Mackay’s
secret journey to Caithness, and his reconciliation with Earl George,
without his knowledge or the advice of Lord Forbes; and that, however
unfavourable the world might construe it, he would endeavour to
colour it in the best way he could, for Mackay’s own credit. He
desired Mackay to consider that a man’s reputation was exceedingly
tender, and that if it were once blemished, though wrongfully, there
would still some blot remain, because the greater part of the world
would always incline to speak the worst; that whatever had been
arranged in that journey, between him and the Earl of Caithness,
beneficial to Mackay and not prejudicial to the house of Sutherland,
he should be always ready to assist him therein, although concluded
without his consent. As to the clan Gun, he could not with honesty or
credit abandon them, and particularly John and his cousin Alexander,
until tried and found guilty, as he had promised faithfully to be
their friend, for revealing the affair of Sanset; that he had made
them this promise at the earnest desire and entreaty of Sir Donald
himself; that the house of Sutherland did always esteem their truth
and constancy to be their greatest jewel; and seeing that he and his
brother, Sir Alexander, were almost the only branches of it then of
age or man’s estate, they would endeavour to prove true and constant
wheresoever they did possess friendship; and that neither the house
of Sutherland, nor any greater house whereof they had the honour to
be descended, should have the least occasion to be ashamed of them
in that respect; that if Sir Donald had quarrelled or challenged the
clan Gun, before going into Caithness and his arrangement with Earl
George, the clan might have been suspected; but he saw no reason to
forsake them until they were found guilty of some great offence.
Sir Robert Gordon, therefore, acting as tutor for his nephew, took
the clan Gun under his immediate protection, with the exception of
Alexander Gun, the burner of the corn, and his accomplices. John Gun
thereupon demanded a trial before his friends, that they might hear
what Sir Donald had to lay to his charge. John and his kinsmen were
acquitted, and declared innocent of any offence, either against the
house of Sutherland or Mackay, since the fact of the burning.
Sir Donald Mackay, dissatisfied with this result, went to Edinburgh
for the purpose of obtaining a commission against the clan Gun from
the council, for old crimes committed by them before his majesty
had left Scotland for England; but he was successfully opposed in
this by Sir Robert Gordon, who wrote a letter to the Lord-Chancellor
and to the Earl of Melrose, afterwards Earl of Haddington and
Lord Privy Seal, showing that the object of Sir Donald, in asking
such a commission, was to break the king’s peace, and to breed
fresh troubles in Caithness. Disappointed in this attempt, Sir
Donald returned home to Strathnaver, and, in the month of April,
1618, he went to Braill, in Caithness, where he met the earl, with
whom he continued three nights. On this occasion they agreed to
despatch Alexander Gun, the burner of the corn, lest Lord Forbes
should request the earl to deliver him up; and they hoped that, in
consequence of such an occurrence, the tribe might be ensnared.
Before parting, the earl delivered to Mackay some old writs of
certain lands in Strathnaver and other places within the diocese of
Caithness, which belonged to Sir Donald’s predecessors; by means
of which the earl thought he would put Sir Donald by the ears with
his uncles, expecting him to bring an action against the Earl of
Sutherland, for the warrandice of Strathnaver, and thus free himself
from the superiority of the Earl of Sutherland.
Shortly after this meeting was held, Sir Donald entered Sutherland
privately, for the purpose of capturing John Gun; but, after
lurking two nights in Golspie, watching Gun, without effect, he was
discovered by Adam Gordon of Kilcalmkill, a trusty dependant of the
house of Sutherland, and thereupon returned to his country. In the
meantime the Earl of Caithness, who sought every opportunity to
quarrel with the house of Sutherland, endeavoured to pick a quarrel
with Sir Alexander Gordon about some sheilings which he alleged the
latter’s servants had erected beyond the marches between Torrish, in
Strathully, and the lands of Berridale. The dispute, however, came to
nothing.
When Sir Robert Gordon heard of these occurrences in the north, he
returned home from Edinburgh, where he had been for some time; and,
on his return, he visited the Marquis of Huntly at Strathbogie, who
advised him to be on his guard, as he had received notice from the
Earl of Caithness that Sir Donald meant to create some disturbances
in Sutherland. The object the earl had in view, in acquainting the
marquis with Mackay’s intentions, was to screen himself from any
imputation of being concerned in Mackay’s plans, although he favoured
them in secret. As soon as Sir Robert Gordon was informed of Mackay’s
intentions he hastened to Sutherland; but before his arrival there,
Sir Donald had entered Strathully with a body of men, in quest of
Alexander Gun, the burner, against whom he had obtained letters
of caption. He expected that if he could find Gun in Strathully,
where the clan of that name chiefly dwelt, they, and particularly
John Gun, would protect Alexander, and that in consequence he would
ensnare John Gun and his tribe, and bring them within the reach
of the law, for having resisted the king’s authority; but Mackay
was disappointed in his expectations, for Alexander Gun escaped,
and none of the clan Gun made the least movement, not knowing how
Sir Robert Gordon was affected towards Alexander Gun. In entering
Strathully, without acquainting his uncles of his intention, Sir
Donald had acted improperly, and contrary to his duty, as the vassal
of the house of Sutherland: but, not satisfied with this trespass,
he went to Badinloch, and there apprehended William M’Corkill, one
of the clan Gun, and carried him along with him towards Strathnaver,
on the ground that he had favoured the escape of Alexander Gun;
but M’Corkill escaped while his keepers were asleep, and went to
Dunrobin, where he met Sir Alexander Gordon, to whom he related the
circumstance.
Hearing that Sir Robert Gordon was upon his journey to Sutherland,
Mackay left Badinloch in haste, and went privately to the parish of
Culmaly, taking up his residence in Golspietour with John Gordon,
younger of Embo, till he should learn in what manner Sir Robert would
act towards him. Mackay, perceiving that his presence in Golspietour
was likely to lead to a tumult among the people, sent his men home to
Strathnaver, and went himself the following day, taking only one man
along with him, to Dunrobin castle, where he met Sir Robert Gordon,
who received him kindly according to his usual manner; and after
Sir Robert had opened his mind very freely to him on the bad course
he was pursuing, he began to talk to him about a reconciliation
with John Gun; but Sir Donald would not hear of any accommodation,
and after staying a few days at Dunrobin, returned home to his own
country.
Sir Donald Mackay, perceiving the danger in which he had placed
himself, and seeing that he could put no reliance on the hollow and
inconstant friendship of the Earl of Caithness, became desirous of
a reconciliation with his uncles, and with this view he offered to
refer all matters in dispute to the arbitrament of friends, and to
make such satisfaction for his offences as they might enjoin. As Sir
Robert Gordon still had a kindly feeling towards Mackay, and as the
state in which the affairs of the house of Sutherland stood during
the minority of his nephew, the earl, could not conveniently admit of
following out hostile measures against Mackay, Sir Robert embraced
his offer. The parties, therefore, met at Tain, and matters being
discussed in presence of Sir Alexander Gordon of Navidale, George
Monroe of Milntoun, and John Monroe of Leamlair, they adjudged that
Sir Donald should send Angus Mackay of Bighouse, and three gentlemen
of the Slaight-ean-Aberigh, to Dunrobin, there to remain prisoners
during Sir Robert’s pleasure, as a punishment for apprehending
William M’Corkill at Badinloch. After settling some other matters
of little moment, the parties agreed to hold another meeting for
adjusting all remaining questions, at Elgin, in the month of June of
the following year, 1619. Sir Donald wished to include Gordon of Embo
and others of his friends in Sutherland in this arrangement; but as
they were vassals of the house of Sutherland, Sir Robert would not
allow Mackay to treat for them.
In the month of November, 1618, a disturbance took place in
consequence of a quarrel between George, Lord Gordon, Earl of
Enzie, and Sir Lauchlan Macintosh, chief of the clan Chattan, which
arose out of the following circumstances:--When the earl went into
Lochaber, in the year 1613, in pursuit of the clan Cameron, he
requested Macintosh to accompany him, both on account of his being
the vassal of the Marquis of Huntly, the earl’s father, and also
on account of the ancient enmity which had always existed between
the clan Chattan and clan Cameron, in consequence of the latter
keeping forcible possession of certain lands belonging to the former
in Lochaber. To induce Macintosh to join him, the earl promised to
dispossess the clan Cameron of the lands belonging to Macintosh,
and to restore him to the possession of them; but, by advice of the
laird of Grant, his father-in-law, who was an enemy of the house of
Huntly, he declined to accompany the earl in his expedition. The earl
was greatly displeased at Macintosh’s refusal, which afterwards led
to some disputes between them. A few years after the date of this
expedition--in which the earl subdued the clan Cameron, and took
their chief prisoner, whom he imprisoned at Inverness in the year
1614--Macintosh obtained a commission against Macronald, younger of
Moidart, and his brother, Donald Glass, for laying waste his lands in
Lochaber; and, having collected all his friends, he entered Lochaber
for the purpose of apprehending them, but, being unsuccessful in
his attempt, he returned home. As Macintosh conceived that he had
a right to the services of all his clan, some of whom were tenants
and dependants of the Marquis of Huntly, he ordered these to follow
him, and compelled such of them as were refractory to accompany him
into Lochaber. This proceeding gave offence to the Earl of Enzie,
who summoned Macintosh before the lords of the Privy Council for
having, as he asserted, exceeded his commission. He, moreover, got
Macintosh’s commission recalled, and obtained a new commission in his
own favour from the lords of the council, under which he invaded
Lochaber, and expelled Macronald and his brother Donald from that
country.
As Macintosh held certain lands from the earl and his father for
services to be done, which the earl alleged had not been performed by
Macintosh agreeably to the tenor of his titles, the earl brought an
action against Macintosh in the year 1618 for evicting these lands,
on the ground of his not having implemented the conditions on which
he held them. And, as the earl had a right to the tithes of Culloden,
which belonged to Macintosh, he served him, at the same time, with
an inhibition, prohibiting him to dispose of these tithes. As the
time for tithing drew near, Macintosh, by advice of the clan Kenzie
and the Grants, circulated a report that he intended to oppose the
earl in any attempt he might make to take possession of the tithes
of Culloden in kind, because such a practice had never before been
in use, and that he would try the issue of an action of spuilzie, if
brought against him. Although the earl was much incensed at such a
threat on the part of his own vassal, yet, being a privy counsellor,
and desirous of showing a good example in keeping the peace, he
abstained from enforcing his right; but, having formerly obtained a
decree against Macintosh for the value of the tithes of the preceding
years, he sent two messengers-at-arms to poind and distrain the corns
upon the ground under that warrant. The messengers were, however,
resisted by Macintosh’s servants, and forced to desist from the
execution of their duty. The earl, in consequence, pursued Macintosh
and his servants before the Privy Council, and got them denounced
and proclaimed rebels to the king. He, thereupon, collected a number
of his particular friends with the design of carrying his decree
into execution, by distraining the crop at Culloden and carrying it
to Inverness. Macintosh prepared himself to resist, by fortifying
the house of Culloden and laying in a large quantity of ammunition;
and having collected all the corn within shot of the castle and
committed the charge of it to his two uncles, Duncan and Lauchlan,
he waited for the approach of the earl. As the earl was fully aware
of Macintosh’s preparations, and that the clan Chattan, the Grants,
and the clan Kenzie, had promised to assist Macintosh in opposing
the execution of his warrant, he wrote to Sir Robert Gordon, tutor
of Sutherland, to meet him at Culloden on the 5th of November, 1618,
being the day fixed by him for enforcing his decree. On receipt of
this letter, Sir Robert Gordon left Sutherland for Bog-a-Gight, where
the Marquis of Huntly and his son then were, and on his way paid a
visit to Macintosh with the view of bringing about a compromise; but
Macintosh, who was a young man of a headstrong disposition, refused
to listen to any proposals, and rode post-haste to Edinburgh, from
which he went privately into England.
In the meantime, the Earl of Enzie having collected his friends,
to the number of 1,100 horsemen well appointed and armed, and 600
Highlanders on foot, came to Inverness with this force on the day
appointed, and, after consulting his principal officers, marched
forwards towards Culloden. When he arrived within view of the castle,
the earl sent Sir Robert Gordon to Duncan Macintosh, who, with his
brother, commanded the house, to inform him that, in consequence of
his nephew’s extraordinary boasting, he had come thither to put his
majesty’s laws in execution, and to carry off the corn which of right
belonged to him. To this message Duncan replied, that he did not
mean to prevent the earl from taking away what belonged to him, but
that, in case of attack, he would defend the castle which had been
committed to his charge. Sir Robert, on his return, begged the earl
to send Lord Lovat, who had some influence with Duncan Macintosh, to
endeavour to prevail on him to surrender the castle. At the desire
of the earl, Lord Lovat accordingly went to the house of Culloden,
accompanied by Sir Robert Gordon and George Monroe of Milntoun, and,
after some entreaty, Macintosh agreed to surrender at discretion;
a party thereupon took possession of the house, and sent the keys
to the earl. He was, however, so well pleased with the conduct of
Macintosh, that he sent back the keys to him, and as neither the clan
Chattan, the Grants, nor the clan Kenzie, appeared to oppose him,
he disbanded his party and returned home to Bog-a-Gight. He did not
even carry off the corn, but gave it to Macintosh’s grandmother, who
enjoyed the life-rent of the lands of Culloden as her jointure.
As the Earl of Enzie had other claims against Sir Lauchlan Macintosh,
he cited him before the lords of council and session, but failing
to appear, he was again denounced rebel, and outlawed for his
disobedience. Sir Lauchlan, who was then in England at court,
informed the king of the earl’s proceedings, which he described
as harsh and illegal, and, to counteract the effect which such a
statement might have upon the mind of his majesty, the earl posted
to London and laid before him a true statement of matters. The
consequence was, that Sir Lauchlan was sent home to Scotland and
committed to the castle of Edinburgh, until he should give the earl
full satisfaction. This step appears to have brought him to reason,
and induced him to apply, through the mediation of some friends,
for a reconciliation with the earl, which took place accordingly,
at Edinburgh, in the year 1619. Sir Lauchlan, however, became bound
to pay a large sum of money to the earl, part of which the latter
afterwards remitted. The laird of Grant, by whose advice Macintosh
had acted in opposing the earl, also submitted to the latter; but
the reconciliation was more nominal than real, for the earl was
afterwards obliged to protect the chief of the clan Cameron against
them, and this circumstance gave rise to many dissensions between
them and the earl, which ended only with the lives of Macintosh and
the laird of Grant, who both died in the year 1622, when the ward
of part of Macintosh’s lands fell to the earl, as his superior,
during the minority of his son. The Earl of Seaforth and his clan,
who had also favoured the designs of Macintosh, were in like manner
reconciled, at the same time, to the Earl of Enzie, at Aberdeen,
through the mediation of the Earl of Dunfermline, the Chancellor of
Scotland, whose daughter the Earl of Seaforth had married.[209]
In no part of the Highlands did the spirit of faction operate so
powerfully, or reign with greater virulence, than in Sutherland
and Caithness and the adjacent country. The jealousies and strifes
which existed for such a length of time between the two great
rival families of Sutherland and Caithness, and the warfare which
these occasioned, sowed the seeds of a deep-rooted hostility, which
extended its baneful influence among all their followers, dependants,
and friends, and retarded their advancement. The most trivial
offences were often magnified into the greatest crimes, and bodies
of men, animated by the deadliest hatred, were instantly congregated
to avenge imaginary wrongs. It would be almost an endless task to
relate the many disputes and differences which occurred during the
seventeenth century in these distracted districts; but as a short
account of the principal events is necessary in a work of this
nature, we again proceed agreeably to our plan.
The resignation which the Earl of Caithness was compelled to make of
part of the feu lands of the bishopric of Caithness, into the hands
of the bishop, as before related, was a measure which preyed upon
his mind, naturally restless and vindictive, and in consequence he
continually annoyed the bishop’s servants and tenants. His hatred was
more especially directed against Robert Monroe of Aldie, commissary
of Caithness, who always acted as chamberlain to the bishop, and
factor in the diocese, whom he took every opportunity to molest.
The earl had a domestic servant, James Sinclair of Dyren, who had
possessed part of the lands which he had been compelled to resign,
and which were now tenanted by Thomas Lindsay, brother-uterine
of Robert Monroe, the commissary. This James Sinclair, at the
instigation of the earl, quarrelled with Thomas Lindsay, who was
passing at the time near the earl’s house in Thurso, and, after
changing some hard words, Sinclair inflicted a deadly wound upon
him, of which he shortly thereafter died. Sinclair immediately fled
to Edinburgh, and thence to London, to meet Sir Andrew Sinclair, who
was transacting some business for the king of Denmark there, that he
might intercede with the king for a pardon; but his majesty refused
to grant it, and Sinclair, for better security, went to Denmark along
with Sir Andrew.
As Robert Monroe did not consider his person safe in Caithness under
such circumstances, he retired into Sutherland for a time. He then
pursued James Sinclair and his master, the Earl of Caithness, for
the slaughter of his brother, Thomas Lindsay; but, not appearing for
trial on the day appointed, they were both outlawed, and denounced
rebels. Hearing that Sinclair was in London, Monroe hastened thither,
and in his own name and that of the bishop of Caithness, laid a
complaint before his majesty against the earl and his servant.
His majesty thereupon wrote to the Lords of the Privy Council of
Scotland, desiring them to adopt the most speedy and rigorous
measures to suppress the oppressions of the earl, that his subjects
in the north who were well affected might live in safety and peace;
and to enable them the more effectually to punish the earl, his
majesty ordered them to keep back the remission that had been granted
for the affair at Sanset, which had not yet been delivered to him.
His majesty also directed the Privy Council, with all secrecy and
speed, to give a commission to Sir Robert Gordon to apprehend the
earl, or force him to leave the kingdom, and to take possession of
all his castles for his majesty’s behoof; that he should also compel
the landed proprietors of Caithness to find surety, not only for
keeping the king’s peace in time coming, but also for their personal
appearance at Edinburgh twice every year, as the West Islanders were
bound to do, to answer to such complaints as might be made against
them. The letter containing these instructions is dated from Windsor,
25th May, 1621.
The Privy Council, on receipt of this letter, communicated the
same to Sir Robert Gordon, who was then in Edinburgh; but he
excused himself from accepting the commission offered him, lest
his acceptance might be construed as proceeding from spleen and
malice against the Earl of Caithness. This answer, however, did not
satisfy the Privy Council, which insisted that he should accept the
commission; he eventually did so, but on condition that the council
should furnish him with shipping and the munitions of war, and all
other necessaries to force the earl to yield, in case he should
fortify either Castle Sinclair or Ackergill, and withstand a siege.
While the Privy Council were deliberating on this matter, Sir
Robert Gordon took occasion to speak to Lord Berridale, who was
still a prisoner for debt in the jail of Edinburgh, respecting the
contemplated measures against the earl, his father. As Sir Robert was
still very unwilling to enter upon such an enterprise, he advised
his lordship to undertake the business, by engaging in which he
might not only get himself relieved of the claims against him, save
his country from the dangers which threatened it, but also keep
possession of his castles; and that as his father had treated him
in the most unnatural manner, by suffering him to remain so long in
prison without taking any steps to obtain his liberation, he would be
justified, in the eyes of the world, in accepting the offer now made.
Being encouraged by Lord Gordon, Earl of Enzie, to whom Sir Robert
Gordon’s proposal had been communicated, to embrace the offer, Lord
Berridale offered to undertake the service without any charge to his
majesty, and that he would, before being liberated, give security to
his creditors, either to return to prison after he had executed the
commission, or satisfy them for their claims against him. The Privy
Council embraced at once Lord Berridale’s proposal, but, although the
Earl of Enzie offered himself as surety for his lordship’s return to
prison after the service was over, the creditors refused to consent
to his liberation, and thus the matter dropped. Sir Robert Gordon was
again urged by the council to accept the commission, and to make the
matter more palatable to him, they granted the commission to him and
the Earl of Enzie jointly, both of whom accepted it. As the council,
however, had no command from the king to supply the commissioners
with shipping and warlike stores, they delayed proceedings till they
should receive instructions from his majesty touching that point.
When the Earl of Caithness was informed of the proceedings
contemplated against him, and that Sir Robert Gordon had been
employed by a commission from his majesty to act in the matter,
he wrote to the Lords of the Privy Council, asserting that he was
innocent of the death of Thomas Lindsay; that his reason for not
appearing at Edinburgh to abide his trial for that crime, was not
that he had been in any shape privy to the slaughter, but for fear
of his creditors, who, he was afraid, would apprehend and imprison
him; and promising, that if his majesty would grant him a protection
and safe-conduct, he would find security to abide trial for the
slaughter of Thomas Lindsay. On receipt of this letter, the lords of
the council promised him a protection, and in the month of August,
his brother, James Sinclair of Murkle, and Sir John Sinclair of
Greenland, became sureties for his appearance at Edinburgh, at the
time prescribed for his appearance to stand trial. Thus the execution
of the commission was in the meantime delayed.
Notwithstanding the refusal of Lord Berridale’s creditors to consent
to his liberation, Lord Gordon afterwards did all in his power to
accomplish it, and ultimately succeeded in obtaining this consent,
by giving his own personal security either to satisfy the creditors,
or deliver up Lord Berridale into their hands. His lordship was
accordingly released from prison, and returned to Caithness in
the year 1621, after a confinement of five years. As his final
enlargement from jail depended upon his obtaining the means of paying
his creditors, and as his father, the earl, staid at home consuming
the rents of his estates, in rioting and licentiousness, without
paying any part either of the principal or interest of his debts,
and without feeling the least uneasiness at his son’s confinement,
Lord Berridale, immediately on his return, assisted by his friends,
attempted to apprehend his father, so as to get the family estates
into his own possession; but without success.
In the meantime the earl’s creditors, wearied out with the delay
which had taken place in liquidating their debts, grew exceedingly
clamorous, and some of them took a journey to Caithness in the
month of April, 1622, to endeavour to effect a settlement with the
earl personally. All, however, that they obtained were fair words,
and a promise from the earl that he would speedily follow them to
Edinburgh, and satisfy them of all demands; but he failed to perform
his promise. About this time, a sort of reconciliation appears to
have taken place between the earl and his son, Lord Berridale; but
it was of short duration. On this new disagreement breaking out,
the earl lost the favour and friendship not only of his brothers,
James and Sir John, but also that of his best friends in Caithness.
Lord Berridale, thereupon, left Caithness and took up his residence
with Lord Gordon, who wrote to his friends at Court to obtain a new
commission against the earl. As the king was daily troubled with
complaints against the earl by his creditors, he readily consented
to such a request, and he accordingly wrote a letter to the Lords
of the Privy Council of Scotland, in the month of December 1622,
desiring them to issue a commission to Lord Gordon to proceed against
the earl. The execution of the commission was, however, postponed
in consequence of a message to Lord Gordon to attend the Court and
proceed to France on some affairs of state, where he accordingly went
in the year 1623. On the departure of his lordship, the earl made
an application to the Lords of the Council for a new protection,
promising to appear at Edinburgh on the 10th of August of this year,
and to satisfy his creditors. This turned out to be a mere pretence
to obtain delay, for although the council granted the protection,
as required, upon the most urgent solicitations, the earl failed to
appear on the day appointed. This breach of his engagement incensed
his majesty and the council the more against him, and made them
more determined than ever to reduce him to obedience. He was again
denounced and proclaimed rebel, and a new commission was granted to
Sir Robert Gordon to proceed against him and his abettors with fire
and sword. In this commission there were conjoined with Sir Robert,
his brother, Sir Alexander Gordon, Sir Donald Mackay, his nephew,
and James Sinclair of Murkle, but on this condition, that Sir Robert
should act as chief commissioner, and that nothing should be done by
the other commissioners in the service they were employed in, without
his advice and consent.
The Earl of Caithness seeing now no longer any chance of evading
the authority of the laws, prepared to meet the gathering storm by
fortifying his castles and strongholds. Proclamations were issued
interdicting all persons from having any communication with the earl,
and letters of concurrence were given to Sir Robert in name of his
majesty, charging and commanding the inhabitants of Ross, Sutherland,
Strathnaver, Caithness, and Orkney, to assist him in the execution of
his majesty’s commission; a ship well furnished with munitions of
war, was sent to the coast of Caithness to prevent the earl’s escape
by sea, and to furnish Sir Robert with ordnance for battering the
earl’s castles in case he should withstand a siege.
Sir Robert Gordon having arrived in Sutherland in the month of
August, 1623, was immediately joined by Lord Berridale for the
purpose of consulting on the plan of operations to be adopted; but,
before fixing on any particular plan, it was concerted that Lord
Berridale should first proceed to Caithness to learn what resolution
his father had come to, and to ascertain how the inhabitants of
that country stood affected towards the earl. He was also to notify
to Sir Robert the arrival of the ship of war on the coast. A day
was, at the same time, fixed for the inhabitants of the adjoining
districts to meet Sir Robert Gordon in Strathully, upon the borders
between Sutherland and Caithness. Lord Berridale was not long in
Caithness when he sent notice to Sir Robert acquainting him that his
father, the earl, had resolved to stand out to the last extremity,
and that he had fortified the strong castle of Ackergill, which he
had supplied with men, ammunition, and provisions, and upon holding
out which he placed his last and only hope. He advised Sir Robert to
bring with him into Caithness as many men as he could muster, as many
of the inhabitants stood still well affected to the earl.
The Earl of Caithness, in the meantime, justly apprehensive of the
consequences which might ensue if unsuccessful in his opposition,
despatched a messenger to Sir Robert Gordon, proposing that some
gentlemen should be authorized to negotiate between them, for the
purpose of bringing matters to an amicable accommodation. Sir Robert,
who perceived the drift of this message, which was solely to obtain
delay, returned for answer that he was exceedingly sorry that the
earl bad refused the benefit of his last protection for clearing away
the imputations laid to his charge; and that he clearly perceived
that the earl’s object in proposing a negotiation was solely to waste
time, and to weary out the commissioners and army by delays, which
he, for his own part, would not submit to, because the harvest was
nearly at hand, and the king’s ship could not be detained upon the
coast idle. Unless, therefore, the earl at once submitted himself
unconditionally to the king’s mercy, Sir Robert threatened to proceed
against him and his supporters immediately. The earl had been
hitherto so successful in his different schemes to avoid the ends
of justice that such an answer was by no means expected, and the
firmness displayed in it served greatly to shake his courage.
Upon receipt of the intelligence from Lord Berridale, Sir Robert
Gordon made preparations for entering Caithness without delay; and,
as a precautionary measure, he took pledges from such of the tribes
and families in Caithness as he suspected were favourable to the
earl. Before all his forces had time to assemble, Sir Robert received
notice that the war ship had arrived upon the Caithness coast, and
that the earl was meditating an escape beyond the seas. Unwilling to
withdraw men from the adjoining provinces during the harvest season,
and considering the Sutherland forces quite sufficient for his
purpose, he sent couriers into Ross, Strathnaver, Assynt, and Orkney,
desiring the people who had been engaged to accompany the expedition
to remain at home till farther notice; and, having assembled all
the inhabitants of Sutherland, he picked out the most active and
resolute men among them, whom he caused to be well supplied with
war-like weapons, and other necessaries, for the expedition. Having
thus equipped his army, Sir Robert, accompanied by his brother,
Sir Alexander Gordon, and the principal gentlemen of Sutherland,
marched, on the 3d of September, 1623, from Dunrobin to Killiernan
in Strathully, the place of rendezvous previously appointed. Here
Sir Robert divided his forces into companies, over each of which
he placed a commander. The following morning he passed the river
Helmsdale, and arranged his army in the following order:--Half-a-mile
in advance of the main body he placed a company of the clan Gun,
whose duty it was to search the fields as they advanced for the
purpose of discovering any ambuscades which might be laid in their
way, and to clear away any obstruction to the regular advance of the
main body. The right wing of the army was led by John Murray of
Aberscors, Hugh Gordon of Ballellon, and Adam Gordon of Kilcalmkill.
The left wing was commanded by John Gordon, younger of Embo, Robert
Gray of Ospisdale, and Alexander Sutherland of Kilphidder. And Sir
Robert Gordon himself, his brother Sir Alexander, the laird of
Pulrossie, and William Mac-Mhic-Sheumais of Killiernan, led the
centre. The two wings were always kept a short distance in advance of
the centre, from which they were to receive support when required. In
this manner the army advanced towards Berridale, and they observed
the same order of marching during all the time they remained in
Caithness.
As soon as Lord Berridale heard of Sir Robert Gordon’s advance, he
and James Sinclair of Murkle, one of the commissioners, and some
other gentlemen, went forward in haste to meet him. The parties
accordingly met among the mountains above Cayen, about three miles
from Berridale. Sir Robert continued his march till he arrived at
Brea-Na-Henglish in Berridale, where at night he encamped. Here they
were informed that the ship of war, after casting anchor before
Castle Sinclair, had gone from thence to Scrabster road, and that
the Earl of Caithness had abandoned the country, and sailed by night
into one of the Orkney Islands, with the intention of going thence
into Norway or Denmark. From Brea-Na-Henglish the army advanced to
Lathron, where they encamped. Here James Sinclair of Murkle, sheriff
of Caithness, Sir William Sinclair of May, the laird of Ratter, the
laird of Forse, and several other gentlemen of Caithness, waited
upon Sir Robert Gordon and tendered their submission and obedience
to his majesty, offering, at the same time, every assistance they
could afford in forwarding the objects of the expedition. Sir Robert
received them kindly, and promised to acquaint his majesty with their
submission; but he distrusted some of them, and he gave orders that
none of the Caithness people should be allowed to enter his camp
after sunset. At Lathron, Sir Robert was joined by about 300 of the
Caithness men, consisting of the Cadels and others who had favoured
Lord Berridale. These men were commanded by James Sinclair, fiar of
Murkle, and were kept always a mile or two in advance of the army
till they reached Castle Sinclair.
No sooner did Sir Robert arrive before Castle Sinclair, which was
a very strong place, and the principal residence of the Earl of
Caithness, than it surrendered, the keys being delivered up to him
as representing his majesty. The army encamped before the castle two
nights, during which time the officers took up their quarters within
the castle, which was guarded by Sutherland men.
From Castle Sinclair Sir Robert marched to the castle of Ackergill,
another strong place, which also surrendered on the first summons,
and the keys of which were delivered in like manner to him. The
army next marched in battle array to the castle of Kease, the last
residence of the earl, which was also given up without resistance.
The Countess of Caithness had previously removed to another residence
not far distant, where she was visited by Sir Robert Gordon, who
was her cousin-german. The countess entreated him, with great
earnestness, to get her husband again restored to favour, seeing he
had made no resistance to him. Sir Robert promised to do what he
could if the earl would follow his advice; but he did not expect that
matters could be accommodated so speedily as she expected, from the
peculiar situation in which the earl then stood.
From Kease Sir Robert Gordon returned with his army to Castle
Sinclair, where, according to the directions he had received from the
Privy Council, he delivered the keys of all these castles and forts
to Lord Berridale, to be kept by him for his majesty’s use, for which
he should be answerable to the lords of the council until the farther
pleasure of his majesty should be known.
The army then returned to Wick in the same marching order which
had been observed since its first entry into Caithness, at which
place the commissioners consulted together, and framed a set of
instructions to Lord Berridale for governing Caithness peaceably
in time coming, conformably to the laws of the kingdom, and for
preventing the Earl of Caithness from again disturbing the country,
should he venture to return after the departure of the army. At Wick
Sir Robert Gordon was joined by Sir Donald Mackay, who had collected
together the choicest men of Strathnaver; but, as the object of the
expedition had been accomplished, Sir Donald, after receiving Sir
Robert’s thanks, returned to Strathnaver. Sir Robert having brought
this expedition to a successful termination, led back his men into
Sutherland, and, after a stay of three months, went to England,
carrying with him a letter from the Privy Council of Scotland to
the king, giving an account of the expedition, and of its happy
results.[210]
FOOTNOTES:
[205] Act James VI., Parl. 3, Cap. 45.
[206] Sir R. Gordon, p. 299.
[207] Gregory’s _Western Highlands_, p. 349, _et seq._
[208] Sir R. Gordon, p. 329, et seq.
[209] Sir Robert Gordon, p. 356, et seq.
[210] Sir Robert Gordon, p. 366, _et seq._