THE MURRAYS OF ATHOLE.--(CONOLUDED.)
JOHN MURRAY, eldest son of the first Marquis of Athole, who succeeded him as second Marquis, was born at Knowsley, the seat of his maternal uncle, the Earl of Derby, on the 24th of Feb- ruary, 1659. He supported William of Orange, as we have seen, in the crisis of the Revolution, though Mackay builds his chief reliance on him on the fact that he had been for some years at variance with his father the Marquis, whom he (Mackay) thoroughly dis- trusted. The peerage-books say that he was much attached per- sonally to William, and this may have been one motive of his conduct at this time, but probably his Presbyterian zeal had more weight. He had a regiment given him by King William, and was one of the Commissioners for inquiring into the massacre of Glen- coe in 1693. In 1695 he was appointed one of the principal Sec- retaries of State fof Scotland, and (his father being still alive) was created Earl Of Tullibardine, Viscount of Glenalmond, and Lord Mrtrray for life, July 27, 1696. The same year he was appointed High Commissioner to the Parliament of Scotland. In the contest for the Presidency of the Session, Tallibardine warmly espoused the cause of Sir William Hamilton of Whitelaw, Justice-Clerk, and is even said to have brought down his commission ; but this was stopped, and 'Sir Hew Dalrymple was appointed to the office, June 7, 1698, after a vacancy of thirty months. On this Tullibardine threw up the Seals, alleging that he could only so justify his pledge tohis friend. He then went into strong opposition, resisting the levying of the eels, and proposing a reduction of the land forces in July, 1698. He also strongly supported the cane of the Darien Com- pany and continued in opposition until the accession of Queen Anne. He was then sworn of the Privy Council, and appointed Lord Privy Seal in April, 1703. His father died in the May of that year, and on the 30th of July followingthe new Marquis was raised to the 'rank of Duke of Athole, and in 1704 invested with the Order of the Thistle. 'He supported -the Act of Security in the Parliament of 1703, by theprovisions of which Act, on the death of the Queen without issue, therErstates were to name a successor from the Protestant descendants of the Royal line of Scotland, but the admitted successor to the Crown of England was excluded from their choice, unless there were such conditions of government settled and executed as might secure the honour and sovereignty of the Scottish Crown and Kinglom,—the freedom, frequency, and power of parliaments,—the religion, freedom, and trade of the nation from English or any foreign influence. The Act was carried in the Estates, but the Commiminner Queensberry told them that he was ready to give the Royal assent to all their acts save that. There was a great rivalry and antagonism between Queensberry and &thole, and the former at this conjuncture was tempted to lend his name and sanction to an accusation against the latter which created no small disturbance in the political atmosphere. An intimation had been received by the Governor of Fort William that there was to be a gathering of the Highland clans at Lochaber, nominally for driving the deer, but really for poli- tical purposes, and the English Ambassador at the Hague had been also informed that a considerable sum in gold had been secretly sent to Scotland through a commercial house there ; while under cover of a general indemnity granted in March to those who would take the oaths, Lindsay, Secretary to the Pretender's Prime Minister, Simon Fraser of Lovat, who had fled for worse crimes than treason, and several other noted Jacobites, made their appearance in the North of Scotland. According to Lovat himself, "he had laid before the exiled Court a plot for raising the Highlands, and he went over fully commissioned to put it in execution." But the clans would not rise, and Lovat returned to France, having, however, during his visit sowed seeds of mischief which rapidly grew and bore fruit immediately afterwards. Lovat had a feud with the Athole family, on account of their having supported a rival claimant to the estates on the death of the late Lord Lovat. " He obtained an interview with Queensberry, on the assurance that he had important secrets to reveal. He made the startling bat not unwelcome statement that Athole was in correspondence with the exiled House, and offered to produce evidence of the fact. He was desired to do so, and took the following method :—He possessed a letter signed with only one initial by the ex-Queen. It spoke as to a friend who would not be wanting when the day for exertion came. It had no address, and is believed to have been intended for the Duke of Gordon. Lovat took the liberty of writing on the blank cover the address of the Marquis of Athole, and so presented the letter, which attested its origin by the likeness of the exiled King on the Seal." The Commissioner sent this letter unopened to the Queen on the 25th of September. " The plotter Ferguson had in the meantime got some clue to Lovat's machinations, and profess- ing to join in them, reached the secret of this trick on Athole. Finding that there was no satisfactory or promising plot in which he could himself embark, he resolved to defeat this piece of mischief, and revealed it to Athole (November 25, 1703). He, indignant at what seemed the secret machinations of his colleague, demanded explanations, and the result of these was that Queens- berry was obliged, in the midst of much censure and ridicule, to quit office." Lovat made his way off to the Continent, but another plotter, David Baillie, was arrested. It was asserted that he had accused Queensberry of having offered him inducements to get up a charge against the Duke of Hamilton, Athole, and Chancellor &afield of holding a traitorous correspondence with the exiled House. He had added to this the assertion that Lord Annandale wished him to fabricate a tale of Hamilton and Athole having met him disguised as women to devise Jacobite plots." He had given intimation of this to Hamilton, and thus brought on himself a charge of leasing-making It is impossible to say how much, if any, of these allegations were founded in fact ; Mr. Hill- Burton inclines to acquit Queensberry, but thinks it not unlikely that Annandale was guilty. But the Privy Council convicted Baillie, and sentenced him to be transported to the West Indies ; a stretch of authority which led to a threat of bringing the matter before Parliament, whereupon the sentence was withdrawn, and Beane pilloried instead, the mob making a hero of him on the occasion. The Scottish Council at the request of Athole had been summoned in January, 1704, and the Duke read a long memorial on the subject of the accusation against him. In the Parliament of Scotland, in July of the same year, he also moved that the Queen having been pleased to signify by her Commissioner that the examination of the plot should be laid before Parliament, he should write to Her Majesty to send down the witnesses and papers relating thereto, that the affair might be examined to the bottom, and those who were unjustly and falsely accused might be vindi- cated, and those who were guilty might be punished as soon as pos- sible. On the 26th of August the Parliament took the plot into con- sideration, but the matter was postponed till next session, and in the end dropped without investigation. The Duke of Athole, in disgust at this, resigned his office of Privy Seal and went into opposition. It was constantly rumoured during the rest of the reign of Anne that he was in correspondence with the Court of St. Germain's, and had even once put his retainers in motion for a southward march, when Hamilton's irresolution put a stop to the enterprise. He vio- lently-opposed the Act of Union through all its stages, and proposed clause prohibiting the Commissioners for that treaty to depart the Kingdom till the Act of the preceding session of the English Parliament declaring the subjects of Scotland aliens, was repealed ; and on the rejection of the clause entered a protest signed by eighty members of the House. He also entered a protest against the clause leaving the nomination of the Commissioners to the Queen. It is strange and perplexing after this to find a charge of corrupt dealing with the Government brought against him by Lockhart, the Jacobite, on the alleged authority of the investigations of the Commissioners for inquiring into the national accounts appointed by Harley and St. John in 1711. According to him Athole had sold himself to the Cabinet for 1,0001., and Lockhart gives a graduated list of other prices of noblemen and leading men, ranging from the Commissioner's plum, 12,3251., and the Earl of March- mont's little gratuity of 1,1041.15s. 7d.,down to Lord Banff's modest disposal of himself for 11/. 2s., which included a change of religion Athole, far from earning his thousand pounds, gave the project for the Union, as we have seen, an uncompromising hostility, and another man, whose name is down on the black list, was prepared to take arms against the measure. These facts are significant when coupled with the additional one that in the report of the Com- mittee of investigation this accusation is not to be found. They had indeed had the matter under consideration, and had examined. Godolphin and others severely as to the truth of their plea that the money was a loan to pay arrears of salary, but though it appeared. that there had been great secrecy and informality in sending the money down, yet the investigation was allowed to drop on this point, perhaps out of delicacy to Athole and others, who had joined their party. The probability seems to be, on the whole, that the payments were for real arrears of salary, &c., but that they were made with the hope of conciliating enemies, and not as actual purchase-money of votes. Lockhart indeed accuses Athole and others of not taking acquittances for what they thus received, and then afterwards, when they obtained certificates from the Lords of the Treasury of what was due to them on account of arrears of pensions and salaries, making no allowance, or but partial allowance, for what they had already received ; but the . charge cannot be accepted in that broad form on his unsupported assertion. " The Duke of Athole," remarks Mr. Hill-Burton, " demanding payment over again, after he had fought a long, hard. battle to defeat the Union, and while indeed he had a charge of high treason hanging over his head, must have been a political. phenomenon worth observing."
After the conclusion of the Treaty of Union Athole retired to Perthshire, and lived there privately in great splendour till the. Tories came into power. Joining them, he was chosen one of the six- teen representative Peers for Scotland in 1710 and 1713, was High Commissioner to the General Assembly of Scotland in 1712, 1713, and 1714, appointed an Extraordinary Lord of Session November 7, 1712, and Lord Privy Seal in 1713. He was counted upon by the Jacobites as a sure friend at this time, but they had found it impossible to get him to commit himself to active measures in their behalf, and when their agents sought interviews with that object, he was (with many other Scotch noblemen) seized with sudden indisposition, which prevented the meeting from taking place. He proclaimed George I. at Perth in 1714, but notwithstanding being looked upon as a doubtful adherent, he was deprived of his office of Privy Seal in September of that year. However, he was appointed Lord-Lieutenant of Perthshire on the 19th of August, 1715, on the breaking out of the rebellion, and his eldest surviving. son having joined the Chevalier's standard, Athole obtained an Act. of Parliament for vesting his honours and estates after his death in Lord James Murray, his second surviving son. He himself died at Huntingtower, in Perthshire, November 14, 1724. He was not a. man of any particular ability, but is said to have been throughout a zealous Presbyterian, even after he had joined the Jacobite party, preferring to the last the clergy of that persuasion to the Episcopa-. Ilan, a fact which much perplexed his Tory allies. His eldest son, John, was killed at the battle of Malplaquet, August 31, 1709, unmarried, and his next son, William, then succeeded to the title of Marquis of Tullibardine. He was one of the first to join the Earl of Marr in 1715, and proclaimed the Chevalier, for which he was attainted of high treason by Act of Parliament. On the failure of the rebellion Tullibardine escaped abroad, but returned to Scotland in 1719, with the Spanish forces sent by Alberoni, add with a commission (not acted on) from the Chevalier appoint- ing him Commander-in-Chief. He joined the insurgents in Kintail, and was present at their defeat at Glenshiel, June 18 of that year, in which he was wounded. On the 28th of July a proclamation was issued for apprehending him, and a price of 2,0001. set on him, but he escaped abroad a second time, and lived in exile twenty-six Years. His next younger brother meanwhile had succeeded to the title and estates of Athole, under the Act obtained by the old Duke. Tullibardine of course did not recognize this disposition, and as- sumed the title also of Duke of Athole. He accompanied the Young Chevalier to Scotland, landing with him at Borodale, July 25, 1745, and on the 19th of August, support by two assistants (being feeble and broken-down by hardships and disappointments rather than age), he unfurled the standard, while the manifesto and commission of Regency were read. He occupied Blair Castle, his brother, the Hanoverian Duke, flying at his approach ; but though he was personally more popular among the clansmen, the tie of feudal attachment had been weakened by his Iong absence, and they hesitated, particularly among the glens nearest the Lowlands,' to join his standard. He was even obliged to send press-gangs to compel the attendance of the defaulters, and the fiery cross was sent round for the last time in Scotland, and with but indifferent success. Tullibardine bitterly complained of this falling off of the clans from their ancient character, but it might have consoled him to some extent that they were still more indifferent to the call of his brother and rival. After the battle of Culloden Tulliba.rdine fled to the westward, but his horse failing, he surrendered on the 27th of April, 1746, being in a bad state of health. He was carried to Leith, put on board a man-of-war on the 13th of May, but did not arrive in London till the 21st of June, the ship having first sailed northWards. He was committed to the Tower of London, very ill, and died there on the 9th Of July, 1746, and was privately interred in the chapel of the Tower. His next brother but one, Lord Charles Murray, a cornet of horse in the Royal service, joined the Chevalier in 1715, and was made prisoner at Preston. He was sentenced to death as a rebel and deserter, but was reprieved, and died without issue in 1720. The next brother, Lord George Murray, ancestor of the present Duke of Athole, was wounded with his brother in the expedition of 1719, escaped abroad, and entered the Sardinian service. Obtaining a pardon and returning to England, he was pre- sented to the King, but he failed in obtaining a commission. He joined the Young Chevalier's standard at Perth in September, 1745, and was appointed Lieutenant-General of the Forces. He was at all the battles, and was the Only good general the Young Chevalier possessed. Of course he was alighted by that true Stuart, bedides being attainted of treason by the British Parlia- ment. He escaped abroad, and joined the Old Chevalier at Rome. He died in exile in Holland on the 11th of October, 1760, leaving three sons and two daughters. His elder brother, James, mean- while had, as we have seen, succeeded to the dukedom of Athole. He had been Lieutenant-Colonel of the Royal Scots Regiment of Foot, and was chosen at the general election of 1715 member of Parliament for Perthshire, and re-chosen in 1722. He was ap- pointed Lord Privy Seal in June, 1733, on the 21st of September elected one of the sixteen representative Peers, and re-chosen in 1734. On the death of James, tenth Earl of Derby, in 1736, he Succeeded to the sovereignty of Man, to the barony of Strange and other baronies, vested in the Stanleys, and descending to heirs gene- ral. His share in opposing the rebellion of 1745 has been already alluded to.' In April, 1763, he was appointed Keeper of the Great Seal, and died at Dunkeld on the 8th of January, 1761. He was twice married, but his only son died in infancy, and he was succeeded by his nephew, John, eldest son of Lord George Murray, who had served in the Earl of Loudon's Highland Regiment, and also in Parliament. On account of his father's attainder it was thought necessary to present a petition to the King, who referred the matter to • the House of Lords, and they decreed, on the 7th of February, 1764; that he was entitled to the honours claimed in his petition, and he became third Duke of Athole. He was a Scotch Representative Peer several times, and a Knight of the Thistle, and died Notember 5, 1774. He had married his cousin, Lady Charlotte Murray, only surviving daughter of the second Duke, who had succeeded to the sovereignty of Man, and baronies of Strange, Sic. In 1765 an Act was passed for carrying into execution a contract between the Lords of the Treasury and the Duke and Ducheas of Athole for the purchase of the Isle of Man and its dependenciea, and it was agreed that 70,000/. should be paid for all their interests and privileges in the same, reserving to them the landed property, with all their rights over the soil, 'manorial, 8:c., with the patronage of the bishopric and ecclesiastical benefices, on an annual payment of 101/. 15s. 11d., and of two falcons to the King and Queen of England. The money was to be laid out in the purchase of landed estates in Scotland, to be entailed in a certain manner. The Duke and Duchess had also a grant of 2,000/. per annum for their lives. The Duchess died on October 13, 1805. Their third son, Lord George Murray, became Bishop of St. David's, and was much occupied with the telegraph system of England, being a great mechanician. John, the eldest son, succeeded as fourth Duke of Atliole, raised a regiment for the public service in 1777, was elected a representative Peer in 1780, and made a British Peer August 18, 1786, as Earl Strange and Baron Murray of Stanley, in Gloucestershire. On February 4, 1793, he was appointed Captain-General and Governor of the Isle of Man,—sworn a Privy Councillor in June, 1797, Lord- Lieutenant of Perthshire, 1798,—and a Knight of the'Thistle; 1799. He succeeded his mother in the Stanley hbnours in 1805; and in the same year obtained an Act of Parlianient (after much` opposition) granting an annual revenue of one-fourth of the net customs receipts for the Isle of Man, after all previous; incurs brances on the same had been diachargeci to Min, and the heirs general of James, seventh Earl of Derby. The Duke subsequently disposed of his remaining property and privileges in the Isle of Man to the Crown for the sum of 400,000/. He died September 29, 1830, and was succeeded by his son John, fifth Duke of Athole, who died unmarried, September 14, 1846, and was succeeded by his nephew, George Augustus Frederiek John, sixth Duke, son of General James Murray, created Lord Glenlyon:, The sixth Duke died in 1864, and was succeeded by his son, the present and seventh Duke, John James Hngh Henry Murray.
The Murrays of Elibank (Lords Elibank) trace themselves from an entirely different ancestry from the Murrays of Athole. The latter—insignificant in earlier times—of the highest signi- ficance, politically as well as socially, in the seventeenth and the first half of the eighteenth centuries, are at present rather eminent as great and influential landed proprietors than as prominent politicians. They are decided adherents of the Conservatiie party, both in the ducal line and in the cadet howae of Mansfield.
Previous page
