|
JAMES STEWART, EARL OF MAR—THE
EARLDOM OF MAR AND LORDSHIP OF GARIOCH RESTORED TO JOHN, LORD ERSKINE.
QUEEN MARY granted to her natural
brother, James Stewart, Prior of St. Andrews, what remained of the lands
of the Earldom of Mar in the hands of the Crown, and on the 7th of
February, 1562, created him Earl of Mar. For a short time he was called
Earl of Mar. Afterward, however, the Queen became aware of the claim of
the Erskine family to this Earldom and Lordship of the Garioch.
Accordingly she resolved to restore them to the legitimate heirs, who were
then represented by John, sixth Lord Erskine.
The first requisite to restoration
was to establish Lord Erskine’s status as heir of the last legitimate
holder of the Earldom of Mar. This was done in the usual way by a retour
of service upon a brieve issued from the Royal Chancery, which was
addressed to the Sheriffs of the counties of Aberdeen, Stirling, and
Clackmannan, assembled in the Town Hall of Edinburgh. The inquest under
the presidency of these sheriffs was held on the 5th of May, 1565; and
among the fifteen jurors who gave the verdict were the following: David,
Earl of Crawford; Sir James Douglas of Drumlanrig; Patrick, Lord Lindsay
of the Byres; James Stirling of Keir, John Grant of Freuchie, John Home of
Blackadder, James Cockburn of Stirling; and Robert Drummond of Carnock.
The verdict of the jurors was that Robert, late Earl of Mar and Garioch,
and Lord Erskine, grandfather of Alexander, Lord Erskine, and great
grandfather of John now Lord Erskine—had died in the peace and faith of
James II., and that John, now Lord Erskine, was the legitimate and nearest
heir of the late Robert, Earl of Mar and Garioch.
Lord Erskine’s status having been established as heir
to Earl Robert, on the 23rd of June, 1565, Queen Mary granted a charter
under the Great Seal, which stated that— Isabel Douglas, Countess of Mar
and Garioch, having died without issue, and the late Robert, Lord Erskine,
having been duly served as the nearest and lawful heir of the Countess
Isabel in the Earldom of Mar and Lordship of the Garioch—John, now Lord
Erskine, who was served as nearest and lawful heir to the late Robert,
Lord Erskine, the heir of the Countess Isabel, had an undoubted hereditary
right to the Earldom of Mar and Lordship of Garioch, notwithstanding that
his predecessors were debarred from the possession of them; therefore
granting to John, Lord Erskine, his heirs and assignees, the Earldom of
Mar and the lands of the Lordship and Regality of the Garioch. The precept
for the infeftment was issued on the 24th of June, the day after the
charter. Thus John, Lord Erskine, became Ninteenth Earl of Mar.
Among the lands specified in the
charter as being in the Earldom of Mar are Strathdon, Strathdee, Braemar,
and Cromar, being portions of the Earldom then in the hands of the Crown.
But seeing that the barony and Castle of Kildrummy, the chief seat of the
Earldom, had been alienated by the Crown, as before indicated, the Manor
of Migvie was declared to be a proper place for the infeftment in the
Earldom of Mar, while the old castle of Dunnideer was to serve the same
purpose for the Lordship and Regality of the Garioch. The Earl immediately
recovered possession of the lands still in the hands of the Crown, but
many years elapsed ere the other lands of the Earldom of Mar could be
recovered, and large portions of them were never recovered.
On the
27th of June, 1565,
John, Earl of Mar, signed an agreement between himself and Robert Stewart,
a natural son of James V., and Abbot of Holyrood, in which the Earl
promised that he would never claim any right to the lands of Cabrach, the
lands and barony of Cluny, and the lands of Logy and Dawane, parts of the
Earldom of Mar, granted by the Queen to her half-brother, Robert, usually
styled Lord Robert.
John, Earl of Mar, was appointed
guardian of the infant King, James VI. The charter restoring to him the
Earldom was ratified by an Act of Parliament on the
19th
of April, 1567.
He married Annabella, a daughter of
Sir William Murray of Tullibardine, by whom he had issue.
On the death of the Regent Lennox in
1571, the Earl of Mar was
elected Regent of Scotland. The Regency of Mar was of short duration. He
died on the 28th of October,
1572.
He was succeeded by his son, John, Twentieth Earl of
Mar, and seventh Lord Erskine. This Earl was a man of great energy and
ability; and he made determined and prolonged efforts to recover the lands
of the Earldom. He was a supporter of the Regent Morton; and he entered
into a bond with the party of the Barons who were opposed to the Duke of
Lennox and Sir James Stewart, Earl of Arran— the King’s favourites. At
length the plot against the King’s favourites was ripe for
execution. The King was very fond of hunting, and on
the 22nd of August, 1582, his Majesty by invitation proceeding to the
grounds of Ruthven Castle, in the neighbourhood of Perth, to enjoy his
favourite amusement. When the sport of the day was concluded, he went to
the Castle of Ruthven as the welcome guest of the Earl of Gowrie.
Everything had passed off in the most pleasing style, and his Majesty at
last retired to rest. The following morning, when the King arose and
looked abroad, he was greatly alarmed by the throng of armed men around
the castle; and on wishing to depart, he discovered that he was a
prisoner. The Earl of Arran was immediately seized and imprisoned, and the
Duke of Lennox was warned to leave the country without delay. This exploit
is known in history as "the Raid of Ruthven."
The King was permitted to step about, although he was
attended by a body of well-armed men, to preserve his royal person from
danger. In a few days he was removed to Stirling, and in October he was
conveyed to Edinburgh. A Parliament was then held at Edinburgh, on the
19th of October, and an Act of Indemnity—or, rather, a vote of thanks—to
the chief actors in the enterprise was passed. This was a game which
parties of the Scottish Barons often played, with varying success.
Despite the vigilance of his keepers, the young King
contrived to escape in the end of June, 1583, and
threw himself into the Castle of St. Andrews. Soon
after, the power of the Ruthven party was terminated. The King issued a
proclamation on the 30th of July, touching "the Raid of Ruthven," and
announced that he had resumed his independent authority. Referring to the
raid, he expressed his willingness to forget the offence and grant
forgiveness to all concerned in it, if they should timeously profess their
penitence; and for a time several of the Barons implicated in the raid
continued members of the Privy Council. But it so happened that on the
23rd of August the Earl of Arran reappeared in the council, and soon
resumed his influence and power in the Government. Indeed he instigated
the young King to prosecute to the utmost all those concerned in "the Raid
of Ruthven," and at last, on the 31st of March, 1584,
it was denounced as "high treason." By this time, a number
of those implicated in it had been tried, one by one or collectively, and
sentenced to banishment or imprisonment, and disgrace.
But the hatred of Arran’s rule had become general, and
a new plot, sanctioned by a bond, was formed against him, in which the
Earls of Mar, Angus, and Gowrie, Lord Lindsay, the Master of Glamis, Claud
Hamilton, John Hamilton, and others were associated. They resolved to
seize Stirling Castle, and then raise an insurrection. On the 10th of
April, the Earl of Mar and the Master of Glamis, with a strong body of
their followers, captured Stirling Castle. But on the 15th of April the
Earl of Gowrie was arrested by Colonel Stewart at Dundee, and immediately
conveyed to Edinburgh. This somewhat disconcerted the insurgent barons. At
the same time the Earl of Arran, with a strong force, advanced against
them; and on the 24th of April they fled from
Stirling, leaving a garrison of only 25 men in the
castle. The following day a royal proclamation was issued for the pursuit
and capture—dead or alive—of the Earls of Mar and Angus, the Master of
Glamis, and other rebels; but they escaped by Lanark to Kelso, and crossed
the Border into England. When the King and his army appeared before
Stirling Castle, the small garrison left by the Barons surrendered, and on
the 28th of April their captain and other three were hanged.
On the 2nd of May, 1584, the Earl of Gowrie was tried
for treason in Stirling Castle by a jury of his peers, including the Earls
of Argyll, Arran, Crawford, and others. He was convicted and beheaded the
same day beneath the castle wall. The same month an act of Parliament was
passed for disinheriting all his posterity; and in August an Act of
Forfeiture was passed between the Countess of Gowrie. From May, 1584, till
midsummer, 1585, the Earl of Arran was the supreme ruler of Scotland. His
policy was clearly manifested in the two short sessions of what is known
as the "running Parliament," and the proceedings of the Privy Council
during the brief period of his sway—in which a series of extremely
despotic acts were passed.
This action and reaction at short intervals, always
issuing in sudden and unexpected changes at the centre of authority, is a
striking characteristic of Scottish history. Lord Maxwell had been for
several generations the leading local personage in Dumfries and its
neighbourhood; and he had frequently held the office of Warden of the
Western March. On the 29th of April, 1581, John, Lord Maxwell, was
appointed to this office by the King and Council. He was a supporter of
Lennox and Arran, and immediately after the execution of Morton, the
regent, Maxwell was created Earl of Morton. The new-made Earl was at feud
with John Johnston of Johnston, a powerful Border laird, and formerly a
Warden of the Western March; and, on the 26th of May, 1582, a royal
proclamation ordered them not to appear with their armed followers in
Edinburgh— "to a day of law appointed to be held on the last day of May."
On the 19th of November the Earl of Morton was deprived of the Wardenship
of the Western March, while his rival Johnston was appointed to the
office. Subsequently, the Earl of Morton was charged with many
misdemeanours, and at last denounced as a rebel. In the winter of 1584 he
appeared as a leader of a Border revolt against Arran’s Government; and in
April a muster of the loyal vassals of the Crown was ordered to proceed
against him; while the gift to him of the Earldom of Morton was revoked.
Therefore he was at war with the King and his Government.
Maxwell had 1000 armed men in the field. The banished
Earls of Mar and Angus and other lords at once saw their opportunity, and
joined Maxwell. In the beginning of November, 1585, they returned, and
having mustered their adherents, met Maxwell at Selkirk. Thence they
marched on Stirling with a force of 8000 men. The King and Arran were in
Stirling when the earls and lords appeared before it. Arran immediately
fled towards the Highlands, while the King, notwithstanding all his craft,
had no alternative but to receive the proffered homage of his rebellious
barons, and pardon them.
Thus the forfeitures of the Earls of Mar, and Angus and
other lords were revoked, and their lands and titles restored to them.
Subsequently the Earl of Mar acted with the Catholic Earls—Huntly,
Crawford, Erroll, Angus, and others.
Touching the recovery of the alienated lands of the
Earldom of Mar and Lordship of Garioch, Earl John took the first important
step in the year 1587, when he presented a supplication to the King and
Parliament, narrating that Isabel Douglas, Countess of Mar, having been
lawfully infeft at the time of her death in the Earldom of Mar and
Lordship of Garioch, holding immediately from the King’s predecessors; and
that the late Robert, Earl of Mar and Lord Erskine, having been served
heir to Isabel, Countess of Mar; and that John, Lord Erskine and Earl of
Mar, the petitioner’s father, having been lawfully retoured as heir to the
Earl Robert, therefore John, now Earl of Mar, was heir by progress to the
Countess Isabel, and heritably entitled to the possession of the Earldom
and its territories, although his ancestors had been "wrongfully debarred
from the possession of the lands of the said Earldom and Lordship, partly
by the troubles which occurred and intervened, and partly from the
iniquity of the time and stifling of the ordinary course of justice by the
partial dealing of such persons as had the Government of our Sovereign
Lord’s predecessors and realm, and offices for the time," notwithstanding
the frequent protests of his predecessors in Parliament and Council. "And
seeing for the said Earl’s better security, and that his highness’ dearest
mother’s good intention may take better effect toward the possession of
the said lands, it is necessary that he should be served heir to his
predecessor who died last vested and seised in the said Earldom and
Lordship, and that a sufficient right of action be established in his
person and his heirs for recovering these lands, and the possession
thereof, notwithstanding the length of time which has
intervened—considering that by the laws and customs of the realm the right
of blood nor any heritable title falls under prescription, nor is taken
away by whatsoever length of time or lack of possession." Therefore the
Earl desired the King and Parliament to examine the rights and evidence
under which the Countess Isabel, Robert, Earl of Mar, and his father,
John, Earl of Mar, held the Earldom.
The above statement and points being heard, seen, and
considered by the King and Parliament, and after careful examination had
been made, the King and the three Estates of Parliament found the rights
above specified to be lawful, valid, and sufficient to prove the points of
the supplication, and ratified, approved, and confirmed the same. "And
declares the aforsaid rights to have as great force and effect in the
person of John, Earl of Mar, as the same had or might have in the person
of the late Countess, Isabel Douglas, or the late Robert, Earl of Mar and
Lord Erskine, her heir, and that he should have full right as heir by
progress to all the lands in which they died vested, seised, and retoured
. . . notwithstanding any exception of
prescription or lack of possession that may be alleged to the contrary.
Always without prejudice to all other lawful defences competent to the
parties having interest.
This Act was passed on the 29th of July, 1587. On that
day the master of Elphinstone, in name and behalf of his father, Robert,
Lord Elphinstone, appeared before the King and Parliament and protested
that this Act in favour of John, Earl of Mar, touching the Earldom of Mar
and Lordship of the Garioch, should not hurt or prejudice Lord Elphinstone
in his possession of the lands and Lordship of Kildrummy.
The same day, George, Earl of Huntly, Lord of Gordon
and of Badenoch, and Lieutenant of the North, appeared in the presence of
the King and Parliament, and protested that this Act in favour of John,
Earl of Mar and the Lordship of Garioch, should be no hurt or prejudice to
him or his friends touching their rights and titles to whatsoever lands
within this Earldom of Mar and Lordship of Garioch: and that they should
be permitted to adduce reasons and defences, whensoever they or their
successors happened to be called upon touching their rights of their lands
and possessions. |
