|
CAITHNESS,
earl of, in the peerage of Scotland, a title possessed since 1455 by the
“lordly line of high St. Clair,” or Sinclair. It is, however, of very
great antiquity, and has been held by different families. It was one of
the titles of the ancient Vikingrs or sea kings. In Torfaeus’ History of
the Orcades, a work which he compiled from the ancient sagas and the
Danish records, mention is made of Dungaldus earl or jarl of Caithness so
far back as the year 875. In the ‘Islands Landnamabok,’ quoted in the
‘Collectanea de Rebus Albanicis,’ it is stated that after Thorseein the
red, sonof Audur the wealthy, had, in conjunction with earl Sigurd the
rich, “conquered Kateness and Sudrland, Ross and Moray, and more than the
half of Scotland, Thorstein reigned as king over these districts until he
was betrayed by the Scotch, and slain in battle. Audur was in Kateness
when she heard of her son Thorstein’s death,” and flying to Orkney, she
there gave away in marriage Gros, the daughter of Thorstein the red, “to
Dungadr, jarl of Kateness; and his daughter Grelauga, by her marriage with
Thorfinn, earl of Orkney, brought the former district once more into the
possession of these earls.” This was sometime after the year 920. In the
same century, one Liotus was earl of Caithness and Orkney. He was probably
a Norwegian, and had defeated his brother Scullius in battle in a contest
for the earldom.
In a charter of
King David the First to the monastery of Dunfermline, in the year 1129,
one Macwilliam is designated earl of Caithness.
Harold earl of
Caithness and Orkney, a powerful chieftain, was a good and faithful
subject of King William the Lion till 1196, when he broke out into
rebellion. The king marched an army into Caithness, on which the earl
submitted, but his sons, Roderick and Torphin, attacking the royal troops,
near Inverness, were defeated, and Roderick slain. The following year, the
earl, instigated by his wife, the daughter of Mached, again sappeared in
arms, and was encountered by the king’s forces, who defeated him and took
him prisoner. On being led fettered before the king, he ordered him to be
closely confined in a turret of Roxburgh castle, where he remained until
the king’s anger was pacified towards him, when he was dismissed on his
humble submission, his son, Torphin, having surrendered himself as a
pledge for his fidelity. On this occasion the southern division of
Caithness, called Sutherland, was taken from Harold [Chalmers’
Caledonia, page 633] and given to Hugh Freskin , sheriff of Inverness,
the progenitor of the earls of Sutherland. Harold having again rebelled
soon after, the king ordered Torphin’s eyes to be put out, and his body
otherwise mutilated, and he died miserably in prison. The earl himself
died in 1206. This Harold is said to have murdered John bishop of
Caithness.
In 1222, John
earl of Caithness and Orkney possessed these earldoms, when Adam bishop of
Caithness, a rigorous exactor of tithes, was assaulted in his episcopal
palace at Halkirk, by the people of his diocese, and burnt to death, a
monk who attended him, named Serlo, being at the same time killed. The
descent of this Adam, says the Orkneyinga Saga, “nobody knew, for the
child had been found at the door of some church.” The men of Caithness
thought him rather hard in his episcopal government, and chiefly
attributed that to the monk Serlo. It was an ancient custom that the
bishop should have a spann of butter of twenty cows from every proprietor
in Caithness. Bishop Adam wanted to increase this impost, and have a
spann, first of fifteen, afterwards of twelve, and, these being
successively granted, ultimately of ten cows. The people complained to the
earl of the bishop’s exactions, but he declined to interfere in the
dispute, on which, in a highly excited state, they attacked the bishop’s
residence. The bishop and his followers were drinking in an upper
apartment, and when the people came, the monk went out to the door, and he
was immediately hewn across the countenance and fell dead into the room.
The bishop then went out, intending to make peace with the people, but
seizing him they conveyed him to a smaller house than his own, and set
fire to it, when the unfortunate bishop was burnt to death. The earl, as
he had refused to interpose for the prevention of this deed, was supposed
to have connived at it, and he was, in consequence, deprived of his estate
by the king, Alexander the Second, but was afterwards permitted to redeem
it, on the payment of a large sum of money, and the giving up the third
part of the earldom. Earl John was murdered in his own house by his
servants in 1231, and his body was consumed to ashes by way of retaliation
for the slaughter of the bishop.
“There is,” says
Lord Hailes (Annals of Scotland, vol. i. p. 48. note), “an
obscurity in our histories concerning the earls of Caithness, which I am
not able to dispel.” This obscurity has greatly puzzled the peerage
writers and genealogists, who are unable to reconcile certain
discrepancies in dates and persons occurring in connexion with the
earldom. According to Crawford’s peerage, Magnus, second son of Gillibrede,
earl of Angus, obtained this earldom from King Alexander the Second, in
1222 [if so, this must have been on the forfeiture of Earl John] on
payment of a yearly duty of ten pounds sterling to the king and his
successors. He had a son, Malcolm, who succeeded him, of whom nothing is
known but his name. His son John, earl of Caithness, was one of the
Scottish nobles to whom King Edward addressed a letter proposing the
marriage of his son to Margaret of Norway; the young queen of Scotland,
dated at Brigham, 12th March 1289-90. He was also one of the
peers who made default when Baliol held his first parliament at Scone 10th
February 1292-3. In 1296 he swore fealty to Edward the First, but his name
does not occur in the Remarks on the Ragman Roll. He died about 1330. His
succession is involved in perplexity. It would appear, however, that this
earl John was succeeded by a daughter or sister, married to Magnus, earl
of Orkney, to whom she brought the earldom of Caithness; that Magnus, earl
of Caithness and Orkney, had two daughters, his heiresses, Margaret,
married to Simon Fraser, (supposed to be the Simon Fraser killed at
Halidonhill in 1333,) and Isabella, married to Malise, earl of Strathearn,
who, in her right, was also earl of Caithness and Orkney, and accordingly
was styled earl of Strathearn, Caithness, and Orkney, and that he had four
daughters, coheiresses; the eldest, whose name is not given, married to
William, earl of Ross; Isabel, to Sir William Sinclair of Roslin; Matilda,
to a person named de le Arde; and the youngest, whose name also has not
been recorded, to Reginald Chene. [Douglas’ Peerage, vol. i. page
293.]
_____
[Earldon of
Caithness]
The title was next possessed by a branch of the royal family of Stewart;
Prince David, earl-palatine of Strathearn, eldest son of King Robert the
Second, by his second wife, Euphamia Ross, having been by his father
created earl of Caithness early in his reign. In several charters he is
styled earl-palatine of Strathearn and earl of Caithness. [See STRATHEARN,
earl of.] His daughter, Euphamia, countess palatine of Strathearn,
resigned the earldom of Caithness in favour of her uncle Walter, Lord
Brechin, second son of King Robert the Second, by Euphamia Ross, and he
accordingly obtained fro King Robert the Third a charter of the earldom of
Caithness and regality thereof. On being afterwards created earl of Athol,
he resigned the earldom of Caithness in favour of his second son, Alan,
who obtained from King James the First, a grant of the earldom, dated at
Perth 15th May 1430, to himself and legitimate heirs male, whom
failing to revert to his father, Walter, earl of Athol. The following year
Donald Balloch, a near relation of the potent lord of the isles, landed in
Lochaber, with a considerable force, and ravaged that district in the most
relentless manner. To check his ferocity and defend the western coast,
Alan earl of Caithness and Alexander earl of Mar marched with the royal
army, and met the island warrior at the ancient castle of Inverlochy, near
Fort William, in the county of Inverness. A bloody conflict ensued, in
which the royal troops were completely defeated. The earl of Caithness was
slain; and sixteen of his personal attendants, besides many barons and
knights, were left dead on the field. Having no issue, the earldom
reverted to his father, and on his attainder for the execrable murder of
his nephew, King James the First, in 1437, it was forfeited and annexed to
the crown.
_____
The next possessor of the title was Sir George de Crichton, the elder of
two sons of Stephen Crichton of Cairns, of the family of Crichton of
Crichton. Having acquired the favour of King James the Second, Sir George
was constituted lord high admiral of Scotland, and obtained several
considerable grants of land from that monarch in 1450, 1451, and 1452, and
in the latter year he was created earl of Caithness, the honours being
limited to the heirs male of his body, by his second wife, Janet Borthwick,
daughter of Sir William Borthwick of Borthwick and relict of James
Douglas, Lord Dalkeith. He had a daughter Janet, who inherited the lands
of Barnton, in the county of Edinburgh, and who married John Maxwell,
supposed to be a younger son of Herbert second Lord Maxwell, by whom she
had a son George Maxwell. The earl of Caithness died in 1455, when the
title became extinct, and the large estates of the earldom, with the
exception of Barnton and Cairns, appear to have reverted to the crown.
_____
The earldom was next, by James the Second, conferred, 28th
August, 1455, on William Sinclair, third earl of Orkney [see ORKNEY, earl
of], lord high chancellor of Scotland, in compensation, as the charter
bears, of a claim of right which he and his heirs had to the lordship of
Niddesdale. He was afterwards designated earl of Orkney and Caithness, but
after 1471, in which year he surrendered to King James the Third the
earldom of Orkney, he was styled earl of Caithness alone. From him the
present branch of the family which now enjoys the title is remotely
descended. He was twice married, and had a son by each wife, both named
William Sinclair. passing by the son of the first marriage, he resigned,
in 1476, the earldom of Caithness in favour of his son by his second wife,
Marjory; and he, in consequence, obtained a charter of the whole lands of
the earldom, &c., to him and his heirs whatsoever, 7th December
of that year.
William Sinclair, the second earl of this race, was killed, with his royal
master, James the Third, at the battle of Flodden in 1513. He married
Mary, daughter of Sir William Keith of Innerugy, by whom he had two sons,
John, his successor, and Alexander Sinclair of Stamster.
John Sinclair, the third earl, in 1516 entered into bonds of friendship
and alliance, for mutual protection and support, with Adam, earl of
Sutherland, from whom, on account thereof, he received a grant of some
lands upon the east side of the water of Ully; notwithstanding of which he
joined the Mackays, and other enemies of the earl of Sutherland, and took
part in all the feuds and quarrels of the country against the Sutherland
family. The earl of Sutherland, in consequence, brought an action before
the lords of council and session against the earl of Caithness to recover
back from him the lands of Strathully, on the ground that he had not
fulfilled the condition on which the lands were granted to him. There were
other minor points of dispute between the earls, to get all which
determined, they both repaired to Edinburgh, where, by the advice of
mutual friends, they referred the decision of their differences to Gavin
Dunbar, bishop of Aberdeen, who pronounced his award 12th March
1524, which put an end to all controversies, and made the earls live in
peace with one another ever after. IN 1529, he and Lord Sinclair [See
SINCLAIR, lord] invaded Orkney with a numerous force, in order to assert
some claim which they professed to have to the Orkney islands, arising out
of the renewed lordship of the earldom of Orkney, and were encountered by
the Orcadians, under the command of James Sinclair, governor of Kirkwall
castle, at Summerdale or Bigswell in Stenness, 18th May of that
year, and there they sustained a most disastrous and signal defeat, the
earl of Caithness and five hundred of his followers being slain, and Lord
Sinclair and the survivors taken prisoners. In the old Statistical account
of Frith and Stenness a copy is inserted of a nineteen years’ respite to
Edward Sinclair and his accomplices, for art and part of the convocation
and gathering of the lieges in arrayed battle against umquhile John earl
of Caithness, and for art and part of the slaughter of the said earl and
his friends. By Elizabeth his wife, daughter of William Sutherland of
Duffus, he had two sons, William, who appears to have died before his
father, and George, fourth earl of Caithness.
The fourth earl was a cruel and avaricious nobleman, who scrupled not at
the commission of the greatest crimes for the attainment of his purposes.
The bishop of Caithness being in banishment in England, the earl and
Donald Mackay, a chief with whom he was in terms of friendship, took
possession of the bishop’s lands, and levied the rent, for the behoof, as
they pretended of the exiled bishop. Mackay possessed himself of the
castle of Skibo, one of the bishop’s palaces, which he fortified, while
the earl, on his part, took possession of the castle of Strabister,
another of the episcopal residences. But upon the restoration of the
bishop, both the earl and Mackay absolutely refused to surrender to him
these, or any other parts of his possessions, or to account to him for the
rents they had collected in his name. On their refusal, the earl of Huntly,
who was at that time Lieutenant-general in the north of Scotland, and the
earl of Sutherland, summoned them to appear before them at Halmsdale, to
answer for their intromissions with the bishop’s rents, and for their
usurpation of his residences The earl immediately obeyed the call, and
although the river of Helmsdale was greatly swollen by recent heavy rains,
he, in order to show his ready submission, crossed it on foot, to the
great danger of his life, as the water was as high as his breast. Having
made a final and satisfactory arrangement, the earl returned into
Caithness. Mackay was committed a prisoner to the castle of Foulis.
On
the arrival of the queen regent at Inverness, in July 1555, having
undertaken a journey to the north at that period, for the repression of
the tumults and disorders then prevalent, she was met by the earls of
Caithness and Sutherland. The former had been requested to bring his
countrymen along with him to the court, and having neglected or declined
to do so, he was committed to prison at Inverness, Aberdeen, and
Edinburgh, successively, and was not restored to liberty till he had paid
a considerable sum of money. He obtained a remission under the great seal,
15th December, 1556, and had two charters of the office of
justiciary from Portinculter to the Pentland Firth, 17th April
1566 and 14th February thereafter, ratified in parliament 19th
April 1567. On the 12th of the latter month and year, he was
one of the jury on the trial of the earl of Bothwell for the murder of
Darnley, and when the verdict of acquittal was returned, he protested in
their name that no crime should be imputed to them on that account,
because no accuser had appeared, and no proof was brought of the
indictment. He took notice, also, that the 9th instead of the
10th of February was specified in the indictment, as the day on
which the murder was committed.
This George, fourth earl of Caithness, had long borne a mortal hatred to
John, earl of Sutherland, and it is said that he instigated his cousin,
Isobel Sinclair, wife of Gilbert Gordon of Gartay, and sister of William
Sinclair of Dumbaith, to poison the earl and countess, who was near her
confinement, while at supper at Helmsdale, in the month of July 1567.
Their only son, and heir, Alexander Gordon, made a very narrow escape, not
having returned in time from a hunting excursion to join his father and
mother at supper. The earl and countess were carried next morning to
Dunrobin, where they died within five days thereafter, and to free himself
from the imputation of being concerned in this murder, the earl of
Caithness punished some of the earl of Sutherland’s most faithful
servants, under the colour of avenging his death. The deceased earl’s
friends, however, apprehended Isobel Sinclair, and sent her to Edinburgh
for trial, but, after being condemned, she died in prison on the day
appointed for her execution. During all the time of her illness she
uttered the most dreadful imprecations on the earl of Caithness, for
having incited her to the horrid act. The eldest son of this woman, John
Gordon, was the next male heir to the earldom of Sutherland, after
Alexander, the son of the murdered earl, and happening to be in the house
when his mother had prepared the poison, and becoming extremely thirsty,
he called for a drink. One of his mother’s servants, not aware of the
preparation, presented to the youth a portion of the poisonous liquid,
which he drank. This occasioned his death within two days, a circumstance
which, with the appearances of the body after death, gave a clue to the
discovery of his mother’s guilt.
The earl of Caithness now formed a design to get the young earl of
Sutherland into his hands, and prevailed upon Robert Stewart, bishop of
Caithness, to write a letter to the governor of the castle of Skibo, in
which the earl of Sutherland resided, to deliver up the castle to him; a
request with which the governor complied. Having taken possession of the
castle, the earl carried off the young man into Caithness, and though only
fifteen years of age, he got him married to Lady Barbara Sinclair, his
daughter, then thirty-two years old. Mackay of Far, an ally of the earl of
Caithness, was the paramour of this lady, and for continuing the connexion
with him, she was afterwards divorced by her husband. In the meantime the
earl of Caithness fixed his residence at Dunrobin castle, in
Sutherlandshire, the seat of his minor son-in-law, whom he treated with
great indignity, and burnt all the papers belonging to the house of
Sutherland, on which he could lay his hands. He expelled many ancient
families from Sutherland, put several of the inhabitants to death, and
banished others, after disabling them in their persons, by new and unheard
of modes of torture, and stripping them of all their possessions. He even
entertained the intention of destroying the earl of Sutherland himself,
and marrying William Sinclair, his own second son, to Lady Margaret
Gordon, the eldest sister of the earl of Sutherland, but the latter being
apprised in time of his designs, made his escape from Dunrobin castle. In
revenge, the earl of Caithness sent his eldest son, John Master of
Caithness, surnamed from his great strength, Garrow [from the Gaelic word
garbh, rough or strong] with a large party of followers, to attack
Hugh Murray of Aberscors and others of that name, residing about the town
of Dornoch, who were firmly attached to the family of Sutherland, and who,
after various skirmishes, took refuge in the town and castle of Dornoch,
which were besieged by the Caithness men, and for a while manfully
defended. After burning the Cathedral and reducing the town, the master
attacked the castle, and the Murrays were, in the end, obliged to
capitulate, and having undertaken to depart out of Sutherland within three
months, they delivered three hostages for fulfilment of the conditions.
The earl refused to ratify the treaty concluded by his son, and basely
beheaded the three hostages. This took place in 1570, and in 1576 the
castle of Girnigo, which was at that period the baronial residence of the
earl of Caithness, became the scene of one of the most fearful atrocities
on record. John Garrow, the master of Caithness, had incurred the
suspicion and displeasure of his father, the earl, on account of the
treaty concluded with the Murrays, because he did not, when he had the
opportunity, extirpate the whole inhabitants of Dornoch. While conversing
with his father, he was arrested by a party of armed men, who, upon a
secret signal being given by the earl, had rushed in at the chamber-door.
He was instantly fettered, and thrust into a dark dungeon below the
castle, in which he dragged out for seven years a wretched existence. At
last his keepers, David and Ingram Sinclair, relatives of his own,
determined to destroy him, and after having kept him for some time without
food; they gave him a large mess of salt beef, and then withholding all
drink from him, left him to die of raging thirst.
The inhuman earl died at Edinburgh 9th September 1582, and his
body was buried in St. Giles’, where a monument was erected to his memory.
His heart was cased in lead, and placed in the Sinclair’s aisle in the
church of Wick, where his murdered son was interred. He had married Lady
Elizabeth Graham, second daughter of William second earl of Montrose, and
had three sons and five daughters. In an incursion of the earl of
Sutherland into Caithness in 1588, afterwards mentioned, one of his
followers having entered the church of Wick, found the leaden box which
enclosed the heart of the cruel earl of Caithness, and disappointed in his
expectations of treasure, he broke the casket open, and flung the
corrupted heart to the winds. His eldest son, John Garrow, had married
Lady Jean Hepburn, only daughter of Patrick, third earl of Bothwell,
sister of the husband of Queen Mary, widow of John prior of Coldingham,
and mother of Francis the turbulent earl of Bothwell, and had issue George
the fifth earl of Caithness, three other sons, and a daughter, married to
Sir John Home of Coldingknows.
George the fifth earl succeeded his grandfather in 1582. He began his
career by avenging his father’s death on his two murderers. David
Sinclair, one of them, resided at Keiss, and the other, Ingram Sinclair,
at Wester. The daughter of the latter was to be married, and a large party
were invited to the wedding. Earl George met David on his way to Wester,
and ran him through the body with his sword. The earl then rode over to
Wester, and accosted Ingram as he was playing at football on the green.
“Do you know,” said he, “that one of my corbies,” so he called his
pistols, “missed fire this morning?” and drawing it from the holster, as
if to look at it, shot him through the head. In 1585 he had a meeting with
the earl of Sutherland at Elgin, in the presence of the earl of Huntly,
and other friends, when the differences between the two earls being
adjusted, they were reconciled for the time to each other. Another meeting
subsequently took place between the two earls at the hill of Bengrime in
Sutherland, when they entered into a confederacy against the clan Gunn. On
the 19th May of the same year (1585) the earl of Caithness had
a remission under the great seal to himself and twenty-two other persons,
for being art and part in the slaughter of David Hume of Crewschawis and
others. In 1587 the old feud broke out again between the rival houses of
Caithness and Sutherland, and both parties assembled their forces at
Helmsdale; but by the mediation of mutual friends a truce was agreed upon,
after the expiry of which the earl of Sutherland invaded Caithness, in
February 1588, when great slaughter and spoil took place. The town of Wick
was also pillaged and burnt, but the church was preserved. The earl of
Caithness, shut up in the castle of Girnigo, which was strongly fortified,
desired a cessation of hostilities, and a conference with the earl of
Sutherland. Another truce was the consequence, which, however, did not
last long, and various battles, skirmishes, and forays ensued between the
rival earls and their followers. The earl of Huntly and others, friends of
the parties, in vain endeavoured to reconcile them effectually, till Marcy
1591, when the earls met at Strathbogie and agreed to live on terms of
amity in future; but in the year 1600, the earl of Caithness, under the
pretence of going on a hunting expedition, again invaded Sutherland, and
encamped near the hill of Bengrime, on which the Sutherland and
Strathnaver men assembled in great force, and marched against him. After
some messages had passed between the two earls, the army of the earl of
Caithness retired, and both in a day or two after disbanded their forces.
He made another attempt in July 1607, to disturb the peace of Sutherland,
but was prevented from accomplishing his purpose by the sudden appearance
in Strathully of the earl of Sutherland at the head of a considerable
force. By the mediation of the marquis of Huntly the earls again met at
Elgin with their mutual friends, and once more adjusted their differences.
In the following year, some servants of the earl of Orkney, being forced
by stress of weather to land in his country, the earl of Caithness
apprehended them, and after forcing them to swallow a quantity of spirits,
which completely, intoxicated them, he ordered one side of their heads and
beards to be shaved, and compelled them to go to sea, although the storm
had not abated. On reaching Orkney they complained to their master, who
immediately laid the case before the king. His majesty referred the matter
to his council for trial, but the earls of Caithness and Orkney having
arrived in Edinburgh, they were induced by their friends to adjust the
business amicably between themselves.
The criminal conduct of this earl of Caithness procured for him the name
of “the wicked earl,” and involved him in constant guarrels and
difficulties. To recruit his exhausted resources he gook into his
employment a coiner named Arthur Smith, who had been tried and condemned
to death for counterfeiting the coin of the realm, but who, on the
intercession of Lord Elphinston, the Lord Treasurer of Scotland, had
obtained a pardon. This person continued in the employment of the earl of
Caithness for seven or eight years. His workshop was under the rock of
castle Sinclair, in a quiet retired place called the Gote, to which there
was a secret passage from the earl’s bedchamber. No person was admitted to
Smith’s workshop but the earl, and in a short time Caithness, Orkney,
Sutherland, and Ross were filled with base money, which was first detected
by Sir Robert Gordon, brother of the earl of Sutherland, when in Scotland
in 1611, and on his return to England he made the king acquainted
therewith. His majesty thereupon addressed a letter to the lords of the
privy council, authorising them to grant a commission to Sir Robert to
apprehend Smith and bring him to Edinburgh. In the following year Smith
was apprehended in his own house in the town of Thurso, and in an
endeavour to rescue him, John Sinclair of Stirkage, nephew of the earl of
Caithness, was slain, and James Sinclair, brother of the laird of Dun,
severely wounded; and to prevent the escape of Smith he was at once put to
death by those in whose custody he was. The earl of Caithness, at that
time in Edinburgh, summoned the leaders of the parties who had killed his
nephew and wounded his kinsman, to appear at Edinburgh and answer for
their conduct. On the other hand his son, Lord Berriedale, and several of
their followers, were prosecuted by Sir Robert Gordon for resisting the
king’s commission and attacking those who bore it. Previous to this
affair, Sir Robert Gordon had caused the earl to be denounced and
proclaimed a rebel to the king. The parties were ordered to appear before
the council at Edinburgh, and on the day appointed they met accordingly,
attended, as the custom then was, by their respective friends. The council
spent three days in investigating the matter, both parties being, in the
meantime, bound over in their recognizances to keep the peace, in time
coming, towards each other. The privy council ultimately granted a warrant
for deserting the criminal prosecutions on a submission being entered
into, July 17, 1612, between the earls of Caithness and Sutherland, of all
the matters in dispute between them. In the previous month, the earl
created a disturbance on the High street of Edinburgh, by assaulting
George Lord Gordon, and great slaughter might but for the extreme darkness
of the night, owing to which the parties could hardly distinguish their
own friends. Soon after he rendered his name for ever infamous by
betraying his kinsman John Lord Maxwell, then under hiding for the murder
of Sir John Johnstone, whom he lured to Castle Sinclair, under the
pretence of affording him shelter and secrecy until he could conveniently
leave the country for Sweden. His real motive, however, was that he might
obtain favour at court by delivering him up. The countess of Caithness,
(Lady Jean Gordon, only daughter of George, fifth earl of Huntly,) who was
Lord Maxwell’s cousin, was likewise deceived by her husband, having been
told by him that a report was spread abroad that it was already known at
court that Lord Maxwell was in concealment in Caithness, and that it was
necessary for their mutual safety to set off for Edinburgh, to explain the
matter; and thus time would be afforded for Lord Maxwell’s escape. That
unfortunate nobleman, then in weak health, was advised to leave Caithness,
and pass through Sutherland, that he might hot be taken in the territories
of his treacherous kinsman; but so anxious were the earl’s servants to
execute their commission that Maxwell was actually taken within the county
of Caithness, conducted to Thurse, where Captain George Sinclair, a
bastard nephew of the earl, was impatiently waiting his arrival, and
carried back a prisoner to Castle Sinclair, where he had so lately been a
favoured and honoured guest. By command of the lords of the privy council,
Lord Maxwell was shortly afterwards delivered up, and on 21st
May 1613, was beheaded at the cross of Edinburgh. In 1614 the earl was
appointed king’s lieutenant for quelling the rebellion of his old enemy,
Patrick, the notorious earl of Orkney, in which he was successful, and his
despatches to the king and secretary of state are quoted in full in the
third volume of ‘Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials,’ pp. 286-292. He seems to
have intruded himself into this commission, by eagerly volunteering his
services to the privy council, so as, if possible, to ingratiate himself
with his sovereign, by suppressing a rebellion which had excited the alarm
even of the court of England. For his services he obtained a pension of a
thousand crowns, and shortly after his return from his expedition to
Orkney, he was made one of the lords of the privy council in Scotland. His
restless disposition and lawless proceedings, however, soon involved him
in ruin. Enraged at the Lord Forbes having succeeded, on the death of his
brother-in-law, George Sinclair, to his lands of Dunray and Dumbaith, he
seized every opportunity of annoying him in his possessions, by oppressing
his servants and tenants, under the pretence of discharging his duty as
sheriff, to which office he had been appointed by the earl of Huntly on
his marriage with his sister. Complaints were made from time to time
against the earl, on account of these proceedings, to the privy council of
Scotland, who in some measure afforded redress; and to protect his tenants
more effectually, Lord Forbes took up his temporary residence in Caithness.
On this, the earl secretly instigated two of the Clan-Gun to burn the corn
of William Innes, a servant of Lord Forbes at Sanset in Caithness in
November 1615; and to remove suspicion from himself he industriously
spread a report that the fire-raising had been done by the tenants of
Mackay, the nephew of Sir Robert Gordon, with whom the Forbeses were then
at feud. The matter, however, having soon been disclosed by the Guns, who
were the actual perpetrators, the earl was closely prosecuted, and he only
obtained his remission, after a long interval, on the following
conditions: 1st, By engaging to satisfy his numerous creditors;
2d, By resigning into the king’s hands the sheriffship and justiciary of
Caithness; 3d, by engaging to present to justice the incendiaries whom he
had employed to burn the corn; and, lastly, to resign to the bishop of
Caithness the house of Strabister, with certain fen lands of that
bishopric, amounting to the yearly value of two thousand merks Scots, in
augmentation of the bishop’s scanty revenues. His son, Lord Berriedale,
whose character was quite different from that of his father, was
imprisoned for his father’s debts for above five years, but the earl
himself obtained a ‘supersedere,’ or protection from legal
diligence from the privy council. The creditors, however, apprized or
sequestrated all his lands. He was denounced rebel in 1621, and his own
son, Lord Berriedale, on the suggestion of Sir Robert Gordon and others,
applied for and obtained a commission to pursue his father! After his long
imprisonment he was released for that purpose, on finding due caution to
return to ward after having executed his commission. In September 1623,
Lord Berriedale and Sir Robert Gordon, the king’s commissioners, having
taken the field against the earl, he precipitately fled to Orkney,
intending to go thence to Norway and Denmark. Castle Sinclair, and his
other principal castles, were immediately taken possession of in the
king’s name; and the commissioners succeeded in restoring peace to the
county of Caithness. He died in comparative obscurity, at Caithness, in
February 1643, at the advanced age of 78. During his last years he
received an aliment from his creditors out of his dilapidated estates. By
his countess he had three sons and one daughter, Lady Anne Sinclair,
married to George thirteenth earl of Crawford.
William Lord Berriedale, the eldest son, appears to have predeceased his
father. By his wife, Mary, daughter of Henry, third Lord Sinclair, he had
a son, John, master of Berriedale, who died of fever at Edinburgh in
September 1639, and was buried in the abbey church of Holyroodhouse. He
had married Lady Margaret Mackenzie, eldest daughter of Colin, first earl
of Seaforth, and had a son George, who succeeded his great-grandfather as
sixth earl of Caithness. He was committed a prisoner to the castle of
Edinburgh 24th July 1668, on account of the slaughter of a
soldier sent to quarter for deficiency of cess and excise. He married in
1637 Lady Mary Campbell, third daughter of Archibald, marquis of Argyle
but had no issue. Being deeply involved in debt, in 1672 he executed a
disposition of his titles, estates, and heritable jurisdictions, in favour
of Sir John Campbell of Glenurchy, his principal creditor, who, after the
death of the earl, in May 1676, took possession of the estates, in virtue
of the above-mentioned disposition, and in June 1677, was created earl of
Caithness. On 7th April following he married the widowed
countess. His right to the title and estates was disputed by George
Sinclair of Keiss, son of Francis, second son of George, fifth earl of
Caithness, the heir male of the family, who, when the new earl was in
London the same year (1678) entered Caithness with an armed force, and
took violent possession of the lands of Keiss, Tister, and Northfield,
which had been included in the disposition of 1672. Earl John, on his
return to Scotland, complained to the privy council, and an order to the
sheriff of Caithness was, in consequence, issued, to call the parties
before him, and ascertain which of them had the best right to the lands.
The sheriff decided in favour of the earl, and charged George Sinclair to
remove, but the messenger was deforced. To support his claim to the lands
in dispute, earl John obtained an order from the privy council, 7th
June 1680, to General Dalzell, to assist with a party of troops, and
raising his own friends and followers, he marked from the banks of the Tay
to beyond the promontory of the Ord. Keiss, on his part, collected a force
of four hundred men, and waited his coming in the burgh of Wick. There he
plentifully regaled his followers, who had not recovered from their revel,
when, on 13th July, they were informed that “the Campbells were
coming” across the country towards them. Inflamed with drink and hatred of
the intruders, the adherents of Keiss rushed furiously upon their
assailants, who were strongly posted on the western bank of the burn of
Altimarlach, on the northern side of the river of Wick. a total rout of
Sinclair’s men immediately ensued. Turning their backs, they fled through
the fully, towards the river, and so great were the numbers killed in
attempting to cross, that, according to tradition, the Campbells, in
pursuit of the fugitives, passed over dryshod on the bodies of the slain.
George Sinclair, thus deprived of his lands, prosecuted the more earnestly
his claim to the title of earl of Caithness, and the privy council, under
a reference from parliament, found that he had a right to that dignity,
and he accordingly took his place as a peer, 15th July 1681.
Sir John Campbell, on being thus obliged to relinquish that peerage, was
created earl of Breadalbane. (See BREADALBANE, earl of, ante.]
In
November 1689 George Sinclair, earl of Caithness, preferred a complaint to
the privy council that Breadalbane had abused, to cruelty and oppression,
the power which the council had given him of fire and sword. Breadalbane
recriminated against him that, among many other things, he had wilfully
burnt the mansion house of Thurso east. Both complaints were remitted to
the court of justiciary. In December of that year articles of treason were
exhibited against Breadalbane for fire-raising, murder, treasonable
garrison of houses, convocation of the lieges, and acting beyond his
warrant from council, but these charges were not brought to trial. In the
following August the earl of Caithness petitioned parliament to put him in
repossession of his paternal estate of Keiss, Tister and Northfield, and
on the 23d September, the privy council, to whom the petition had been
referred, found that he had been unwarrantably deprived of these lands,
and therefore ordained him to be restored to them. After the death of the
earl, however, in 1698, the earl of Breadalbane again obtained possession
of Keiss and the other two estates mentioned, but he was hated by the
Sinclairs, who burned the corn and houghed the cattle of the tenants on
the estates, till at last he divided the whole of his lands in Caithness
into sixty-two portions, great and small, and sold them to different
persons. Jane Sinclair, sister and heiress of the deceased earl, and the
wife of Sir James Sinclair of Mey, was forcibly removed out of the house
of Keiss, which she possessed after the death of her brother, by a writ of
ejectment and a party of armed men.
On
the death of the seventh earl, the title developed on the heir male, John
Sinclair of Mey, the grandson of Sir James Sinclair of Murchil, second son
of John, master of Caithness, and brother of the fifth earl. John, who
thus became the eighth earl, took the oaths and his seat in parliament 25th
July 1704. He died in 1705, leaving by his wife, Janet Carmichael of the
Hyndford family, three sons and one daughter.
Alexander, the eldest son, was the ninth earl of Caithness. The Hon. John
Sinclair of Murchil, or Murkle, the second son, became a member of the
faculty of advocates in 1713, was appointed a lord of session, 3d November
1733, and died at Edinburgh, 5th June 1755. He married Lady
Anne Mackenzie, daughter of George, first earl of Cromarty, but had no
issue.
The ninth earl took the oaths and his seat in parliament, 17th
December 1706, while the treaty of union was before the house, and voted
against all the articles of that treaty discussed subsequent to that date.
He possessed the title sixty years, outliving every peer who had sat in
the Scots parliament, and died 9th December 1765, in the 81st
year of his age. He married 13th February 1738, Lady Margaret
Primrose, second daughter of Archibald, first earl of Roseberry, and had
one child, Lady Dorothea Sinclair, married to James, second earl of Fife,
without issue. The ninth earl had devised his own estate, and that of
Murkle, (to which he had succeeded on his brother’s death,) failing his
own heirs male and the heirs male of his brother Francis, and the younger
sons, successively of his daughter, the countess of Fife if she had any,
to George Sinclair of Woodhall one of the lords of session, and his heirs
male, his nearest lawful heir male of line. A competition arose for the
landed property betwixt the countess of Fife and Sir John Sinclair of
Stevenson, nearest male heir of line of Lord Woodhall. The court of
session preferred Sir John Sinclair, 24th June 1766, and its
decision was affirmed on appear 6th April 1767.
The earldom of Caithness devolved on William Sinclair of Ratter, fifth in
descent from Sir John Sinclair of Greenland, third son of John, master of
Caithness, the father of the fifth earl. This William Sinclair was born 2d
April 1727, and on the death of Alexander the ninth earl in 1765 he sued
out a brief from the chancery for serving himself heir male to that earl.
One James Sinclair likewise sued out a brief to the same effect, and
stated in pedigree to be from Sir James Sinclair of Murchil, second son of
John, master of Caithness. At the peers’ election, 21st August
1766, the latter claimed his place as earl of Caithness, but was not
admitted by the lord register. At subsequent elections he tendered his
vote, but with the same result. On the 28th November 1768,
William Sinclair of Ratter was served nearest lawful heir male to
Alexander, ninth earl of Caithness. He then presented a petition to the
king, claiming that title and dignity, which petition was, by his
majesty’s command, remitted to the House of Lords; and it was resolved by
the committee of privileges 7th May 1772, that he had made out
his right, and he accordingly became the tenth earl. He died at Edinburgh
28th November 1779, in the 53d year of his age. By his
countess, Barbara, daughter of Sinclair of Scotscalder, he had issue,
John, eleventh earl of Caithness, another son, and two daughters.
John, the eleventh earl, entered the army as an ensign in the 17th
foot, in September 1772, and became major of the 76th foot, 29th
December 1777. He served some years in America, and was wounded in the
groin by a musket ball while reconnoitering with Sir Henry Clinton at the
siege of Charlestown. He succeeded his father in 1779, and had the rank of
lieutenant-colonel in the army, 19th February 1783.. He died
suddenly at London, 8th April 1789, in the 33d year of his age.
His lands of Ratter and Hollandmark were brought to a judicial sale, and
sold for £13,313. His brother having died childless, the title went to a
very distant branch of the family, Sir James Sinclair of Mey, the ninth in
lineal descent from George Sinclair of Mey, third and younger son of the
fourth earl.
James, the twelfth earl, was born at Barrogill castle, 32st October 1766.
He succeeded his father, Sir John Sinclair of Mey, baronet, in the
baronetcy in 1774, (that title having been conferred on the family, 2d
January 1631), and became twelfth earl in 1789, but did not immediately
assume the title. His lordship was chosen one of the sixteen
representative Scots peers, at the general election in 1807. He was
lord-lieutenant of the county of Caithness, and lieutenant-colonel of the
Ross-shire militia. He died in October 1823. He married at Thurso castle,
2d January 1784 Jane, second daughter of General Alexander Campbell of
Barcaldine, deputy governor of Fort George, niece of the late Sir John
Sinclair of Ulbster, baronet, and had issue, John, Lord Berriedale, who
died 1st June 1802, in his fourteenth year; Alexander, Lord
Berriedale, who succeeded as thirteenth earl; four other sons, and three
daughters.
The thirteenth earl was born 24th July 1790. In early life he
was for some time in the army as ensign and lieutenant in the 42d
regiment. Died in 1855. He married, 22d November 1813, Frances Harriet,
youngest daughter and coheiress of the Very Rev. William Leigh of Aushall
Hall, Staffordshire, dean of Hereford; issue, James, 14th earl,
born 16th Dec. 1821, married in 1847, the youngest daughter of
Sir George Richard Philips, baronet; two other sons, one of whom died
young. Issue of 14th earl, a daughter born 1854, and a son,
Lord Berriedale, born 1858.
The earldom of Caithness, says Douglas in his Peerage, is not in its
proper place in the union roll, being postponed to Rothes, Morton, Buchan,
Glencairn, Eglinton, and Cassillis, although these six were created
subsequently to 1455. |
