History of the Mackenzies Part 18

III. George Augustus Frederick Wellington, who, born in 1824, married in November, 1850, Maria Louisa, daughter of General Thomas Marriot, H.E.IC.S., and died, without issue, in 1852.

IV. Mary Frances, who married, in 1838, the Hon. Philip Anstruther, Colonial Secretary of Ceylon, with issue.

V. Caroline Susan, who, in 1844, married John Berney Petre, and died in 1867.

VI. Louisa Caroline, who, on the 17th of November, 1858, married, as his second wife, William Bingham second Lord Ashburton, who died on the 23rd of March, 1864, with issue, an only daughter, Mary Florence, who, in 1884, married the Hon. William George Spencer Scott, Earl Compton, M.P., eldest surviving son and heir of William Douglas Compton, fourth Marquis of Northampton, born in 1851, with issue - William Bingham Lord Wilmington, born in 1885; and Lady Margaret Louisa Lizzie.

Mrs Stewart Mackenzie and her husband, on her death on the 28th of November, 1862, were succeeded in the estates by their eldest son,

XXIII. KEITH WIILLIAM STEWART MACKENZIE,

Born on the 9th of May, 1818. He was an officer in the 90th Regiment and subsequently Colonel-Commandant of the Ross-shire Highland Rifle Volunteers. He sold what remained of Kintail in 1869. He married first, on the 17th of May, 1844, Hannah Charlotte, daughter of James Joseph Hope Vere of Craigie Hall and Blackwood, Midlothian, with issue -

I. James Alexander Francis Humberston, his heir.

II. Susan Mary Elizabeth, who on the 15th of August, 1871, married, first, the Hon. John Constantine Stanley, Colonel Grenadier Guards, second son of the Right Hon. Edward Lord Stanley of Alderley. He was born on the 30th of September, 1837, and died on the 27th of April, 1878, leaving issue - two daughters. She married, secondly, the Right Hon. Sir Francis Henry Jeune, Q.C., President of the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division of the High Court of Justice, with issue - one son.

III. Julia Charlotte Sophia, who on the 8th of October, 1873, married, as his second wife, the Right Hon. Arthur, ninth Marquis of Tweeddale, who died in 1878, without issue. In 1887 she married, secondly, as his second wife, the Right Hon. Sir John Rose, Baronet, G.C.M.G., of Queensgate, London, who died in 1888, without issue.

In 1892 she married, thirdly, Captain William Evans Gordon, without issue.

IV. Georgina Henrietta, who died young, on the 15th of October, 1868.

His first wife died in June, 1868. He married, secondly, on the 2nd of June, 1871, Alicia Almeira Bell, with issue - one daughter.

Keith Stewart Mackenzie died in June, 1881, when he was succeeded by his only son,

XXIV. JAMES ALEXANDER FRANCIS HUMBERSTON STEWART MACKENZIE,

Who was born on the 9th of October, 1847, Lieutenant-Colonel Commanding the 9th Lancers, and now of Seaforth. He is still unmarried.

THE CHIEFSHIP.

It has been shown at p. 343 that the male line of Colonel Alexander Mackenzie of a.s.synt, fourth son of Kenneth Mor, third Earl of Seaforth, became extinct on the death, in 1815, of Francis Humberston Mackenzie, who survived all his male issue. It has also been proved that the male line of George, second Earl of Seaforth, who died in 1651, terminated in Kenneth, XIX. of Kintail and sixth Earl of Seaforth, whose only child, Lady Caroline Mackenzie, formed an irregular union with Lewis Drummond, Count Melfort, a French n.o.bleman. It was shown earlier, at p. 246, that the lineal representation of the original line of Kintail was diverted from heirs male in the person of Anna, Countess of Balcarres, eldest daughter of Colin, first Earl of Seaforth, who had no surviving male issue; and the male line of Colonel Mackenzie of a.s.synt having terminated in "The Last of the Seaforths," who died in 1815, we must go back beyond all these to an earlier collateral branch to pick up the legitimate male succession, and for ever dispose of the various unfounded claims. .h.i.therto made to the Chiefship of the clan.

Before the appearance of the former edition of this work there had been several claimants to this highly honourable position; and this is not to be wondered at, for whoever proves his right to the Chiefship of the Mackenzies establishes at the same time his right to the ancient honours of the house and Barons of Kintail.

In an earlier part of the work, at p. 316, it is shown that the original t.i.tle of Lord Mackenzie of Kintail did not come under the attainder of William, the fifth Earl, for the part which he took in the Rising of 1715, and therefore the Chief of the Mackenzies, as heir male of the first Lord Mackenzie of Kintail, is, in virtue of that position, we believe, ent.i.tled to a.s.sume that ancient t.i.tle.

The first formal claim to the Chiefship is one by a Captain Murdoch Mackenzie, "of London," who claimed "the t.i.tles, honours, and dignities of Earl of Seaforth and Baron Mackenzie of Kintail,"

in virtue of a pretended descent and pedigree from the Hon.

John Mackenzie of a.s.synt, second son of Kenneth Mor, third Earl of Seaforth. This pedigree and claim is before us. According to that doc.u.ment the Hon. John Mackenzie of a.s.synt had a son "Murdoch Mackenzie of Lochbroom, who, having shown a disposition of enterprise like his kinsman Earl William, left his native parish in 1729 or 1730, first for Aberdeen and afterwards for Northumberland, where, in consequence of the unsettled state of Scotland, he resided with his family." This Murdoch had a son, John Mackenzie, "born in Beadnall, parish of Bamborough, county of Northumberland, in 1738, who married Miss Isabella Davidson in 1762, and died in 1780, in his forty-second year." John had a son, "Captain Murdoch Mackenzie, the claimant, who was born at Beadnall, county of Northumberland, in 1763, and married in 1781, Miss Eleanor Brown of the same place, and has issue. He commanded the ship Ess.e.x, transport 81, of London, during the late war. Being desirous to see his clan in the North, in 1790 he visited the late Francis Lord Seaforth, who in the true spirit of Scotch sincerity, hospitality, and n.o.bility received him with demonstrations of pleasure. After talking over family matters his Lordship candidly said that Captain Murdoch ought to have been the peer in point of primogeniture."

A short account of the family accompanies the pedigree and claim, which concludes in these terms - "In consequence of the death of the last peer it has been discovered in Scotland that the t.i.tles and family estates have devolved upon Captain Murdoch Mackenzie of London. This gentleman is naturally anxious to establish his rights, but being unable to prosecute so important a claim without the aid of sufficient funds he has been advised to solicit the aid of some individuals whose public spirit and liberal feelings may prompt them to a.s.sist him on the principle that such timely a.s.sistance and support will be gratefully and liberally rewarded.

Captain Mackenzie hereby offers to give his bond for L300 (or more if required) for every L100 that may be lent him to prosecute his claim - the same to become due and payable within three months after he shall have recovered his t.i.tles and estates." The result of this appeal has not been ascertained, but it is certain that Captain Murdoch Mackenzie did not succeed in establishing any claim either to the t.i.tles or estates of the House of Kintail and Seaforth.

It was, on the contrary, placed absolutely beyond dispute by the evidence produced at the Allangrange Service in 1829 that the eldest and only surviving son of the Hon. John Mackenzie of a.s.synt was not Murdoch but Kenneth, and there is no trace whatever of his having had any son but Kenneth. In an original Precept issued by the Provost and Magistrates of Fortrose on the 30th of October, 1716, the son of the then late John Mackenzie of a.s.synt is designated "Kenneth Mackenzie, now of a.s.synt, grandchild and apparent heir to the deceased Isobel, Countess Dowager of Seaforth, his grandmother on the father's side." In the same doc.u.ment Kenneth is described as her Ladyship's "nearest and lawful heir," conclusively showing that he was her son John's eldest son. It is thus fully established that Captain Murdoch Mackenzie's genealogical chain fails at the very outset - is broken in its initial link. The Hon. John Mackenzie of a.s.synt had only one son. His name was Kenneth, not Murdoch, and he died without issue. If any additional proof be required to show that the male line of the Hon. John Mackenzie of a.s.synt has long been extinct, it will be found in the fact that on the death of Earl Kenneth, known as "the Little Lord," in 1781, the succession to the representation and ancient honours of the family of Kintail and Seaforth, devolved upon the heir male of Colonel Alexander Mackenzie of a.s.synt, who was the fourth son of Kenneth Mor, third earl, and a younger brother of the Hon. John Mackenzie of a.s.synt, apart altogether from the conclusive parole evidence given by very old people at the Allangrange Service in 1829. This effectually disposes of Captain Murdo Mackenzie.

Now as to the more plausible but equally baseless claim of Captain William Mackenzie of Gruinard, and his cousin, the late Major-General Alexander Mackay Mackenzie of the Indian Army. Captain Murdoch Mackenzie's claim having failed, we must go back another step in the chain to pick up the legitimate succession to the honours of Kintail and Seaforth. Here we are met on the way by another claim, put forward by the late Captain William Mackenzie of Gruinard, in the following letter addressed to George F. Mackenzie, then of Allangrange:

11 Margaret Street, Cavendish Square, London, 24th October 1829.

My Dear Allangrange, - Having observed in the "Courier" of the 21st inst., at a meeting at Tain, that you were proceeding with the Seaforth Claims, I take the earliest opportunity of communicating to you a circ.u.mstance which I am sure my agent, Mr Roy, would have informed you of sooner, did he know that you were proceeding in this affair; and which, I think probable, he has done ere this; but lest it might have escaped his notice, I deem it proper to acquaint you that on Mr Roy having discovered, by authenticated doc.u.ments, that I was the lineal descendant of George, Earl of Seaforth, he authorised an English counsellor to make application to the Secretary of State to that effect, who made a reference to the Court of Exchequer in Scotland to examine the evidence - Mr Roy having satisfied them with having all which he required to establish my claim. I therefore am inclined to address you in order that you may be saved the trouble and expense attending this affair.

Indeed, had I known you were taking any steps in this business, be a.s.sured I would have written to you sooner.

I had not the pleasure of communicating with you since your marriage, upon which event I beg leave to congratulate you, and hope I shall soon have the pleasure of learning of your adding a member to the Clan Kenneth. Believe me, my dear Mac, yours most sincerely,

WM. MACKENZIE.

This claim is founded on a Genealogical Tree in possession of the present representatives of the Gruinard family, by which John Mackenzie, their progenitor is incorrectly described as the son of George Mackenzie of Kildun, second son of George, second Earl of Seaforth. It is believed that the descendants of this George, who was the second George designated of Kildun, are long ago extinct; but whether they are or not, it will be conclusively shown, by reference to dates, that John, I. of Gruinard, could not possibly have been a son of his. And to the indisputable evidence of dates may be added the testimony of all the Mackenzie MSS. in existence which make any reference to John of Gruinard. In every instance where his name appears in these he is described as a natural son of George, second Earl of Seaforth.

Before this Earl succeeded he also was known as George Mackenzie of Kildun, hence the error in the Gruinard Genealogical Tree. The author of the Ancient MS., so often quoted in the course of this work, was a contemporary of John, I. of Gruinard, and he states that Earl George "had also "ane naturall" son, called John Mackenzy, who married Loggie's daughter." The author of the Ardintoul MS., who was the grandson, as mentioned by himself, of the Rev.

Farquhar Macrae, Constable of Ellandonnan Castle in Earl Colin's time, and who died advanced in years as far back as 1704 - consequently a contemporary of John of Gruinard - describing the effects of the disastrous battle of Worcester, says that Earl George, who was then in Holland, was informed of the result of the battle "by John of Gruinard, "his natural son," and Captain Hector Mackenzie, who made their escape from the battle," that the tidings "unraised his melancholy, and so died in the latter end of September, 1651." The Letterfearn MS. is also contemporary, for the author of it speaks of Earl Kenneth as ""now" Earl of Seaforth," and of George of Kildun in the present tense, while he speaks of his father in the past tense, and he say's that "He (Earl George) left "ane natural son,"

who "is" called John, who "is" married with Logie's daughter."

That John of Gruinard was married to Christina, daughter of Donald Mackenzie, III. of Loggie, is proved by a sasine dated 1655, in which that lady is described as his wife.

It may be objected to these MSS. that, however probable it may be that they are correct, they are not necessarily authentic. But there is ample evidence of an official and incontestible character on the point. A sasine, dated 6th of February, 1658, is recorded in the Particular Register of Sasines of Inverness, vol. 7, fol. 316, from which the following is an extract - "Compearit personally John Mackenzie, "naturall" broyr to ane n.o.ble Erle Kenneth Erle of Seaforth Lord of Kintail, etc., as bailzie in that part," on behalf of "the n.o.ble Lady, Dame Isobell Mackenzie, Countess of Seaforth, sister german to Sir George Mackenzie of Tarbat, Knight, future ladie to the said n.o.ble Erle." Another authentic doc.u.ment having a most important bearing on this question was recently discovered in the office of the Sheriff-Clerk of Tain. It is a discharge by Patrick Smith of Braco, dated and registered in the Commissary Books at Fortrose, on the 4th of December, 1668, in which the parties are described as "Kenneth Erle of Seafort, Lord Kintail, as princ.i.p.al, and John Mackenzie of Gruinyard, designit in the obligatione vnder-wrytten his "naturall" brother, as cautioner." Further, George of Kildun married, first, Mary Skene, daughter of Skene of Skene, in 1661. This is proved by a charter to her of her jointure lands of Kincardine, etc. (see Particular Register of Sasines Invss., vol.

ix. fol. 9). He married, secondly, Margaret, daughter of Urquhart of Craighouse. The absolute impossibility is at once obvious of George of Kildun - who only married his first wife in 1661 - having had a son, John Mackenzie of Gruinard, in a position to have obtained a charter in his favour of the lands of Little Gruinard, etc., in 1669 - within eight years of his reputed father's marriage to his first wife - and who was himself designated in that charter as of "Meikle Gruinard," while it is proved by undoubted official doc.u.ments that John of Gruinard's "wife" had lands disponed to her as his wife in 1655; that is, six years before the marriage of George of Kildun, John's alleged father. And further, how could John of Gruinard's second son, Kenneth, have married, as be is known to have done, the widow of Kenneth Og, fourth Earl of Seaforth, who died in 1701, if John, his father, had been the son by a second marriage of George of Kildun, who married his first wife in 1661? The thing is absolutely impossible.

Kenneth Mor, third Earl of Seaforth, who, according to the Gruinard Genealogy, was John of Gruinard's uncle, was born at Brahan Castle in 1635. In 1651 he is described as "a child" by a contemporary writer, who says that the Kintail people declined to rise with him in that year during his father's absence on the Continent, because "he was but a "child," and his father, their master, was in life."

Colin, first Earl of Seaforth, died in 1633, and the author of the Ancient MS. says that "Earl George, being then the Laird of Kildun, married before his brother's death, the Lord Forbes's daughter."

Thus, George of Kildun could not have been born before 1636 or 1637 at the very earliest; and the date of his first marriage, twenty-four years later, strongly corroborates this. How then could he have had a married son, John Mackenzie of Gruinard, whose wife undoubtedly obtained lands in 1655; that is, when Kildun himself was only 18 years of age, and when John, already designated of Gruinard, was, in 1656, old enough to be cautioner for Kenneth, Earl of Seaforth? Proof of the same conclusive character could be adduced to any extent, but in face of the doc.u.ments already quoted, it is obviously superfluous to do so.

John Mackenzie, I. of Gruinard, could not in the nature of things have been a son of the second George Mackenzie of Kildun. He was, on the other hand, undoubtedly, the "natural" son of the first George, who succeeded his brother Colin as second Earl of Seaforth, and it necessarily follows that his representatives can have no claim whatever to the Chiefship of the Clan, or to the ancient honours of the family of Kintail and Seaforth. We shall now proceed to show that these distinctions belong to and are at present possessed by the male representative of

THE MACKENZIES OF ALLANGRANGE.

HAVING disposed of the only two serious claims made to the Chiefship of the Clan in later times our next step is to show who the present Chief is. To do this we must go back to Kenneth, created Lord Mackenzie of Kintail in 1609; for there is no male representative of any later head of the House in existence, so far as can be ascertained, between that date and this. Lord Kenneth had seven sons -

1. Colin Ruadh or "the Red Earl," his heir and successor, who died, in 1633, without surviving male issue.

2. John Mackenzie of Lochslinn, who married Isabel, daughter of Alexander Mackenzie, V. of Gairloch, and died in 1631, having been poisoned at Tam, without issue male. His only daughter, Margaret, married Sir Norman Macleod, I. of Bernera, with issue.

3. Kenneth, who died unmarried.

Lord Kenneth, XII. of Kintail, married secondly, Isabel, daughter of Sir Gilbert Ogilvie of Powrie, with issue -

4. Alexander, who died unmarried.

5. George, who succeeded his brother Colin, as second Earl of Seaforth, and whose line terminated in Lady Caroline Mackenzie, who died without issue in 1847, her father Kenneth, Baron Ardelve and Earl of Seaforth in the peerage of Ireland, the last male of his line, having died at the Cape of Good Hope in 1781.

6. Thomas Mackenzie of Pluscardine, whose male issue was proved extinct at the Allangrange Service in 1829.

7. SIMON MACKENZIE, who, after the death of his brother John, was designated of Lochslinn, and whose representative will be shown to be the present head and heir male of the ancient family of Kintail and Seaforth, and Chief of the Clan. This SIMON married, first, Elizabeth, daughter of the Rev. Peter Bruce of Ferrar, D.D., Princ.i.p.al of St. Leonard's College, St. Andrews, and son of Bruce of Fingask, by Elizabeth, daughter of Alexander Wedderburn of Blackness, with issue - five sons and one daughter, Jane, who married Robert Douglas of Katewell, in the parish of Kiltearn, Ross-shire, and secondly, Sir James Grant of Moyness.

The eldest of Simon's five sons was the famous SIR GEORGE MACKENZIE of Rosehaugh, Lord Advocate for Scotland, whose history is so well known that it would serve no good purpose to give only such a brief account of it as could be given in the s.p.a.ce here available.

He wrote several works of admitted literary merit, his "Inst.i.tutes"

being to this day considered a standard legal authority. He left an autobiography in MS. which was published by his widow in 1716.