|
MURRAY, a very
common surname in Scotland, the origin of which has already been
explained; see ATHOL, duke of, and MORAY, a surname. An account of the
Murrays of Tullibardine, the ancestors of the Athol family, is given
under the former head, and those of Bothwell and Abercairney under the
latter.
____
The first baronet of the
family of Murray of Blackbarony was Sir Archibald Murray, who was
created a baronet of Nova Scotia, May 15, 1628. He was the son of Sir
John Murray, eldest son of Andrew Murray of Blackbarony, whose ancestors
had been seated at Blackbarony for five generations prior to 1552. Sir
John was the brother of Sir Gideon Murray, lord-high-treasurer of
Scotland and a lord of session, father of the first Lord Elibank, and of
Sir William Murray, ancestor of the Clermont family. Lieutenant-colonel
Sir Archibald John Murray, baronet of Blackbarony, formerly of the Scots
fusilier guards, son of Sir John Murray, baronet of Blackbarony, by his
wife, Anne Digby, of the noble family of Digby, died, without issue, May
22, 1860. He was succeeded by his brother, Sir John Digby Murray,
baronet, born in 1798, married, 1st, in 1823, Miss Susannah Cuthbert,
issue one son, John Cuthbert; 2dly, in 1827, Frances, daughter and
coheiress of Peter Patten Bold, Esq., M.P., of bold Hall, Lancashire;
issue, 3 sons and 4 daughters.
_____
The family of Murray of
Clermont, Fifeshire, which possesses a baronetcy (date 1626), is a
branch of the ancient house of Murray of Blackbarony, whose baronetcy is
dated two years later. Sir William Murray, 4th and youngest son of Sir
Andrew Murray of Blackbarony, who lived in the reign of Mary, queen of
Scots, was knighted by James VI., and having acquired the estate of
Clermont in Fifeshire, it became the designation of his family. His only
son, William Murray of Clermont, was created a baronet of Nova Scotia,
July 1, 1626. Sir James Murray, 5th baronet, receiver-general of the
customs in Scotland, died in February 1699, without issue, when the
title devolved on his nephew, Sir Robert Murray, 6th baronet, who died
in 1771. His eldest son, Sir James Murray, 7th baronet, a distinguished
military officer during the first American war, was adjutant-general of
the forces serving on the continent in 1793. He married in 1794 the
countess of Bath in her own right, and in consequence assumed the
surname and arms of Pulteney. He subsequently held the office of
secretary at war; was colonel of the 18th foot, and a general in the
army. He died April 26, 1811, leaving no issue, when his half-brother,
Sir John Murray, became 8th baronet. Sir John was a lieutenant-general
in the army, and colonel of the 56th foot. He died, without issue, in
1827, when the title and estates devolved upon his brother, the Rev. Sir
William Murray, who died May 14, 1842. The eldest son of the latter, Sir
James Pulteney Murray, 10th baronet, died unmarried, Feb. 2, 1843. His
brother, Sir Robert Murray, born Feb. 1, 1815, became 11th baronet;
married, in 1839, Susan-Catherine Sanders, widow of Adolphus Cottin
Murray, Esq., and 2d daughter and co-heir of John Murray, Esq. of
Ardeleybury, Herts, lineally descended from Sir William Murray, father
of 1st earl of Tullibardine; with issue, a son, William Robert, 23d
fusiliers, born in 1840, and a daughter.
_____
The first baronet of the
Stanhope family was Sir William Murray of Stanhope, an active supporter
of the royal cause during the civil wars, who for his loyalty was
created a baronet of Nova Scotia, after the Restoration, with remainder
to his heirs male whatsoever, 13th February 1664. His ancestor, John
Murray of Falahill, descended from Archibald de Moravia, mentioned in
the chartulary of Newbottle in 1280, was known in history as the outlaw
Murray. He died in the early part of the reign of James V. His exploits
are commemorated in one of the ballads of the ‘Minstrelsy of the
Scottish Border.’ His married Lady Margaret Hepburn, and had, with three
daughters, two sons. His eldest son, John Murray of Falahill, was
ancestor of the Murrays of Philliphaugh. His second son, William Murray,
married Janet, daughter and heiress of William Romanno of that ilk,
Peebles-shire, and had a son, William Murray of Romanno, living in
December 1531. The great-grandson of the latter, Sir David Murray, who
was knighted by Charles I., acquired the lands of Stanhope in the same
county, and was the father of Sir William Murray, the first baronet of
Stanhope. Sir David Murray, the fourth baronet, was implicated in the
rebellion of 1745, and received sentence of death at York the following
year, but was subsequently pardoned on condition of his leaving the
country for life. The family estates were sold under the authority of
the court of session. Sir David died in exile, without issue, when the
representation of the family devolved on his uncle, Charles Murray,
collector of the customs at Borrowstownness, who, had the title not been
forfeited, would have been fifth baronet. His son, Sir David Murray,
died without issue at Leghorn, 19th October 1770. The representation of
the family then devolved on John Murray of Broughton, the well-known
secretary to Prince Charles. This personage having assumed the title
after the general act of revisal, became Sir John Murray of Broughton,
baronet. He married Margaret, daughter of Colonel Robert Ferguson,
brother of William Ferguson of Carloch, Nithsdale, and had three sons,
David, his heir, Robert, and Thomas, the last a lieutenant-general in
the army. Sir John died 6th December 1777. His eldest son, Sir David, a
naval officer, was succeeded, on his death in June 1791, by his brother,
Sir Robert, ninth baronet. The son of the latter, Sir David, became the
tenth baronet in 1794, and on his death, without issue, was succeeded by
his brother, Sir John Murray, eleventh baronet; married, with issue.
_____
The first baronet of the
Ochtertyre family was William Moray of Ochtertyre, who was created a
baronet of Nova Scotia, with remainder to his heirs male, 7th June 1673.
He was descended from Patrick Moray, the first styled of Ochtertyre, who
died in 1476, a son of Sir David Moray of Tullibardine. The family
continued to spell their name Moray till 1739, when the present
orthography was adopted by Sir William, 3d baronet. Sir William Murray,
5th baronet, married Lady Augusta Mackenzie, youngest daughter of 3d
earl of Cromartie; issue, 3 sons and 2 daughters. He died in 1800. Of
General Sir George Murray, G.C.B., his second son, a memoir is given
below.
The eldest son, Sir
Patrick Murray, 6th baronet, born Feb. 3, 1771, passed advocate at the
Scottish bar in 1793, and was appointed a baron of the court of
exchequer in Scotland in 1820. He died June 1, 1837. By his wife, Lady
Mary Hope, youngest daughter of the 2d earl of Hopetoun, he had 5 sons
and 4 daughters. Capt. John Murray, the 2d son, assumed the name of
Gartshore, on succeeding to the estate of that name in Dumbartonshire.
Sir William Keith Murray,
the eldest son, 7th baronet of Ochtertyre, born in 1801, married 1st,
Helen Margaret Oliphant, only child and heiress of Sir Alexander Keith
of Dunnottar, knight marischal of Scotland; issue, 10 sons and 3
daughters; 2dly, Lady Adelaide, youngest daughter of 1st marquis of
Hastings. He assumed the name of Keith, on his marriage with his first
wife, and on her death in Oct. 1852, his eldest son, Patrick, born Jan.
27, 1835, captain grenadier guards, (retired in June 1861), succeeded to
the estates of Dunnottar, Kincardineshire, and Ravelston, Mid Lothian.
Sir William died Oct. 16, 1861, when his eldest son, Sir Patrick, became
8th baronet.
_____
The Murrays of Touchadam
are supposed to derive from the Morays, lords of Bothwell. Their
progenitor, Sir William de Moravia, designed of Sanford, joined Robert
the Bruce, but being taken prisoner by the English, was sent to London
in 1306, and remained in captivity there until exchanged after the
battle of Bannockburn. His son and successor, Sir Andrew de Moravia,
called by David II. “our dear blood relation,” obtained from that
monarch a charter of the lands of Kepmad in Stirlingshire, dated 10th
May 1365. This was his first acquisition in that county. ON 28th July
1369 he received another royal charter of the lands of Toulcheadam, as
Touchadam was then called, and Tuichmaler, in the same county. His
great-grandson and representative, William Murray of Touchadam, was
scutifer to James II., and was appointed constable of Stirling castle
under James III. His eldest son, David Murray of Touchadam, having no
issue, made a resignation of his whole estate to his nephew, John Murray
of Gawamore, captain of the king’s guards and lord provost of Edinburgh,
who succeeded to the same on the death of his uncle, about 1474. He was
a firm and devoted adherent of James III., and after the battle of
Sauchieburn he was deprived of a considerable portion of his lands. A
great number of the family writs were at the same time embezzled or
lost. His son, William Murray, the seventh from the founder of the
family, Sir Andrew de Moravia, about 1568, married Agnes, one of the
daughters and coheiresses of James Cuninghame of Polmaise,
Stirlingshire, whereby he acquired that estate. His son and successor,
Sir John Murray, knight, got a charter under the great seal of the lands
and barony of Polmaise, 8th April 1588. His grandson, Sir William Murray
of Touchadam and Polmaise, obtained from Charles I. a charter of the
lands of Cowie in 1636. During the civil wars, he supported the royal
cause, and was at the battle of Preston in 1648, when the army of the
royalists under the duke of Hamilton was defeated. In 1654 he was fined
by Cromwell £1,500.
William Murray of
Touchadam and Polmaise succeeded his father, William Murray of Touchadam,
Polmaise, and Pitlochie in Fife, in 1814. He died in 1847, when his
cousin, John Murray, born in 1797, the 19th from Sir Andrew de Moravia,
succeeded. He married in 1830, Elizabeth, daughter of James Bryce, Esq.
Edinburgh, with issue. His eldest son, John, captain grenadier guards,
was born in 1831.
_____
The first on record of
the family of Murray of Philiphaugh in Selkirkshire, Archibald de
Moravia, mentioned in the chartulary of Newbottle in 1280, was also
descended, it is supposed, from the Morays, lords of Bothwell. In 1296
he swore fealty to Edward I. His son, Roger de Moravia, obtained in
1321, from James, Lord Douglas, the superior, a charter of the lands of
Fala, subsequently designated Falahill, for many years the chief title
of the family. The 5th in direct descent from Roger was John Murray of
Falahill, the celebrated outlaw, who took possession of Ettrick Forest
with 500 men,
“-----------------a’ in ae
liverye clad,
O’ the Lincome grene sae gaye to see;
He and his ladye in purple clad,
O! gin they lived not royallie!”
The king, James IV., sent
James Boyd to him,
“The earle of Arran his
brother was he,”
To ask him of whom he
held his lands, and desiring him to come and be the king’s “man,”
“And hald of him you
foreste free.”
On Boyd delivering this
message to him,
“Thir landis are mine! The
outlaw said;
I ken nae king in Christentie;
Frae Soundron I this foreste wan,
When the king nor his knightis were not to see.”
And he declared his
intention to keep it
“Contrair all kingis in
Christentie.”
The king, in consequence,
set forth at the head of a large force, to punish the outlaw, and force
him to submission. The outlaw summoned to his aid his kinsmen Murray of
Cockpool and Murray of Traquair, who hastened to Ettrick with all their
men. The barony of Traquair before it came into the possession of the
Stuarts (earls of Traquair) was the property of the family of Murray,
ancestors of the Murrays of Blackbarony. The lands of Traquair were
forfeited by Willilmus de Moravia previous to 1464. They were
afterwards, by a charter from the crown dated 3d February 1478, conveyed
to James Stewart, earl of Buchan, son of the black knight of Lorne, from
whom they descended to the earls of Traquair. On the approach of the
royal force, the outlaw, “with four in his cumpanie,” came and knelt
before the king and said,
“I’ll give thee the keys
of my castell,
Wi’ the blessing o’ my gay ladye,
Gin thou’lt make me sheriffe of this Foreste,
And a’ my offspring after me.”
To this the king
consented, glad to receive his submission on any terms, and the usual
ceremony of feudal investiture was gone through, by the outlaw resigning
his possessions into the hands of the king, and receiving them back, to
be held of him as superior.
“He was made sheriffe of
Ettricke Foreste,
Surely while upward grows the tree;
And if he was na traitour to the king,
Forfaulted he suld never be.”
It is certain that, by a
charter from James IV., dated November 30, 1509, John Murray of
Philiphaugh is vested with the dignity of heritable sheriff of Ettrick
Forest, which included the greater part of what is now Selkirkshire, an
office held by his descendants till the abolition of the heritable
jurisdictions in 1747. “The tradition of Ettrick Forest,” says Sir
Walter Scott, in his introduction to ‘The Sang of the Outlaw Murray,’ in
the ‘Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border,’ “bears that the outlaw was a
man of prodigious strength, possessing a baton or club, with which he
laid lee (i.e. waste) the country for many miles round, and that he was
at length slain by Buccleuch, or some of his clan, at a little mount,
covered with fir trees, adjoining to Newark castle, and said to have
been part of the garden. A varying tradition bears the place of his
death to have been near to the house of the duke of Buccleuch’s
gamekeeper, beneath the castle, and that the fatal arrow was shot by
Scott of Haining from the ruins of a cottage on the opposite side of the
Yarrow. There was extant, within these twenty years, some verses of a
song on his death. The feud betwixt the outlaw and the Scotts may serve
to explain the asperity with which the chieftain of that clan is handled
in the ballad.” The laird of Buccleuch had counseled “fire and sword”
against the outlaw; for, says he,
“He lives by reif and
felonie!”
But the king gave him
this rebuke:
“And round him cast a
wilie ee, --
Now, hand thy tongue, Sir Walter Scott,
Nor speak of reif nor felonie: --
For, had every honest man his awin kye,
A right puir clan thy name wad be!”
The outlaw’s wife, Lady
Margaret Hepburn, was the daughter of the first earl of Bothwell. He had
two sons, James, his heir, and William, ancestor of the Murrays of
Romanna, afterwards Stanhope, baronets (see above).
James Murray of Falahill,
the elder son, died about 1529, and his son, Patrick Murray of Falahill,
obtained, under the great seal, a charter, dated 28th January 1528, of
the lands of Philiphaugh, situated near the royal burgh of Selkirk, and
celebrated as the scene of the signal defeat of the marquis of Montrose,
15th September 1645, by General Leslie. The hollow under the mount
adjoining the ruins of Newark castle, mentioned above as the place where
the outlaw Murray is said to have been slain, is called by the country
people Slain-man’s lee, in which, according to tradition, the
Covenanters, a day or two after the battle of Philiphaugh, put many of
their prisoners to death. A number of human bones were, at one period,
found there, in making a drain.
Patrick’s
great-great-grandson, Sir John Murray of Philiphaugh, knight, was
appointed by the Scottish Estates one of the judges for trying those of
the counties of Roxburgh and Selkirk, who had joined the standard of
Montrose in 1646. In 1649 he claimed £12,014, for the damages he had
sustained from Montrose. He died in 1676.
His eldest son, Sir James
Murray of Philiphaugh, born in 1655, was admitted a lord of session in
1689, and appointed lord-register in 1703. On his death in 1708, he was
succeeded by his eldest son, John Murray of Philiphaugh, M.P. from 1725
till his decease in 1753. This gentleman’s fourth son, Charles, married
a sister of Robert Scott, Esq. of Danesfield, Bucks, and was grandfather
of Charles Robert Scott Murray, Esq. of Danesfield, M.P. for that
county.
The eldest son, John
Murray of Philiphaugh, was several times M.P. for the county of Selkirk,
and once for the Selkirk burghs, after a severe and expensive contest
with Mr. Dundas. He died in 1800. His eldest son, John Murray of
Philiphaugh, died, unmarried, in 1830, and was succeeded by his only
surviving brother, James Murray of Philiphaugh, the 17th of the family,
in a direct line; married, with issue.
_____
The Murrays of Lintrose,
Perthshire, are a junior branch of the Murrays of Ochtertyre, being
derived from Mungo Murray, born 15th July 1662, youngest son of Sir
William Murray of Ochtertyre, baronet, by Isabel, his wife, the daughter
of John Oliphant, Esq. of Bachelton. Captain William Murray, a son of
this family, served with the 42d Highlanders, under Wolfe, in America,
and afterwards in the West Indies. Subsequently, with the rank of major
in the same distinguished regiment, he served under General Howe against
the American revolutionists. On the 15th September 1776, when the
reserve of the British army were in possession of the heights above New
York, Major Murray was nearly carried off by the enemy, but saved
himself by his strength and presence of mind. Attacked by an American
officer and two soldiers, he kept his assailants at bay for some time
with his fusil; but closing upon him, his dirk slipped behind him, and
being a corpulent man, he was unable to reach it. Snatching the sword of
the American officer from him, he soon compelled the party to retreat.
He wore the sword as a trophy during the campaign. He became
lieutenant-colonel 27th regiment, and died the following year.
_____
The Murrays of Cringletie,
Peebles-shire, are descended from a junior branch of the family of
Murray of Blackbarony. James Wolfe Murray, Esq. of Cringletie, born in
1814, eldest son of James Wolfe Murray, Lord Cringletie, a senator of
the College of Justice, by Isabella Katherine, daughter of James Charles
Edward Stuart Strange, Esq., (godson of Prince Charles Edward,)
succeeded his father in 1836; appointed to 42d Royal Highlanders in
1833; married in 1852, Elizabeth Charlotte, youngest daughter of John
Whyte Melville, Esq., and grand-daughter of 5th duke of Leeds, with
issue. His son, James Wolfe Murray, was born in 1853.
_____
Other old families of the
name are the Murrays of Broughton, Wigtownshire; Murray of Murraythwaite,
Dumfries-shire; and Murray of Murrayshall, Perthshire. The family of
Murraythwaite have been settled there since about 1421.
The Murrays of
Murrayshall derive in the male line from the ancient family of Graeme of
Balgowan, and in the female, from that of Murray, Lord Balvaird, whose
eldest son succeeded as Viscount Stormont (see STORMONT, Viscount of).
John Murray, advocate, son of Andrew Murray of Murrayshall, at one
period sheriff of Aberdeenshire; born in 1809, succeeded in 1847;
married in 1853, Robina, daughter of Thomas Hamilton, Esq.; educated at
Edinburgh university, M.A. 1828. Passed advocate in 1831.
The Murrays of Henderland, Peebles-shire, have given two judges to the
court of session, namely, Alexander Murray, Lord Henderland, who died in
1795, and his second son, Sir John Archibald Murray, appointed in 1839,
when he assumed the judicial title of Lord Murray. He had previously
been lord-advocate, and recorder of the great roll, or clerk of the
pipe, in the court of exchequer, Scotland, a sinecure office which had
also been held by his father, and was resigned by Lord Murray, some time
before his first appointment as lord-advocate in 1834. He was M.P. for
the Leith district of burghs from 1832 to 1838. He died in 1859.
MURRAY, SIR ROBERT,
one of the founders and the first president of the Royal Society of
London, was the son of Sir Robert Murray of Craigie, by a daughter of
George Halket of Pitferran. He is supposed to have been born about the
beginning of the seventeenth century, and received his education partly
at St. Andrews and partly in France. Early in life he entered the French
army, and became so great a favourite with Cardinal Richelieu that he
soon obtained the rank of colonel. He returned to Scotland about the
time that Charles I. took refuge with the Scots army; and, while his
majesty was with the latter at Newcastle in December 1646, he formed a
plan for the king’s escape, which was only frustrated by Charles’ want
of resolution. “The design,” says Burnet, “proceeded so far that the
king put himself in disguise, and went down the back stairs with Sir
Robert Murray; but his majesty, apprehending it was scarce possible to
pass through all the guards without being discovered, and judging it
highly indecent to be catched in such a condition, changed his
resolution, and returned back.” In May 1651, being then in Scotland with
Charles II., he was appointed justice-clerk, an office which appears to
have remained vacant since the deprivation of Sir John Hamilton in 1649.
A few days after he was sworn a privy councilor, and in the succeeding
June was nominated a lord of session, but he never exercised the
functions of a judge. At the Restoration he was reappointed a lord of
session, and also justice-clerk, and made one of the lords auditors of
the exchequer; but these appointments were merely nominal, to secure his
support to the government; for, though he was properly the first who had
the style of lord-justice-clerk, he was ignorant of the law, and it does
not appear that he ever sat on the bench at all. He was high in favour
with the king, Charles II., by whom he was employed in his chemical
processes, and was, indeed, the conductor of his laboratory. He was
succeeded in the office of justice-clerk in 1663 by Sir John Home of
Renton; and in 1667 he had a considerable share in the direction of
public affairs in Scotland, when, not being so obstinately bent on the
establishment of Episcopacy as some of his colleagues, an unusual degree
of moderation marked for a time the proceedings of the government. Sir
Robert’s principal claim to distinction, however, consists in his having
been one of the founders of the Royal Society of London, and its first
president. “While he lived,” says Bishop Burnet, “he was the life and
soul of that body.” He was a member of almost all its committees and
councils, and besides assisting in obtaining its charter, in July 1622,
and in framing its statutes and regulations, was indefatigably zealous
in promoting its interests in every respect. Several of his papers,
chiefly on the phenomena of the tides, on the mineral of Liege, and on
other scientific subjects, are inserted among the early contents of the
Philosophical Transactions. Sir Robert Murray, who had married a sister
of Lord Balcarres, died suddenly, in his pavaillion, in the Garden of
Whitehall, July 4, 1673, and was interred at the king’s expense in
Westminster Abbey.
MURRAY, THOMAS, an
eminent portrait painter, was born in Scotland in 1666; and at an early
age went to London, where he became a pupil of Riley, state-painter to
Charles II., and successor to Sir Peter Lely. He studied nature
carefully, and in his colouring and style imitated his master, Riley. He
painted portraits with great success and credit; and being employed by
the royal family, as also by many of the nobility, he acquired, in the
course of time, a considerable fortune. The portrait of Murray, by
himself, is honoured with a place in the gallery of painters at
Florence. He died in 1724.
MURRAY, PATRICK,
fifth Lord Elibank, a learned and accomplished nobleman. See ELIBANK,
Lord.
MURRAY, WILLIAM,
first earl of Mansfield, a celebrated lawyer and statesman, the fourth
son of David, fifth Viscount Stormont, was born at Perth, March 2, 1705.
He was removed to London in 1708, and in 1719 was admitted a king’s
scholar at Westminster school. In June 1723 he was entered at Christ
Church, Oxford, where he distinguished himself by his classical
attainments. In 1730 he took the degree of M.A., and afterwards traveled
for some time on the Continent. Having become a student at Lincoln’s
Inn, he was called to the bar at Michaelmas term 1731. His abilities
were first displayed in appeal cases before the House of Lords, and he
gradually rose to eminence in his profession. In 1736 he was employed as
one of the counsel for the lord provost and town council of Edinburgh,
to oppose in parliament the Bill of Pains and Penalties, which
afterwards, in a modified form, passed into a law against them, on
account of the Porteous riots. For his exertions on this occasion, he
was presented with the freedom of the city of Edinburgh in a gold box.
In November 1742 he was appointed solicitor-general in the room of Sir
John Strange, who had resigned. About the same time he obtained a seat
in the House or commons, as member for Boroughbridge, in Yorkshire. His
eloquence and legal knowledge soon rendered him very powerful in debate,
and as he was a strenuous defender of the duke of Newcastle’s ministry,
he was frequently opposed to Pitt, afterwards earl of Chatham; these two
being considered the best speakers of their respective parties. In March
1746 he was appointed one of the managers for the impeachment of Lord
Lovat, and the candour and ability which he displayed on the occasion
received the acknowledgments of the prisoner himself, as well as of the
Lord-chancellor Talbot, who presided on the trial.
In 1754 Mr. Murray
succeeded Sir Dudley Ryder as attorney-general, and on the death of that
eminent lawyer, in November 1756, he became lord-chief-justice of the
king’s bench. Immediately after he was created a peer of the realm, by
the title of Baron Mansfield, in the county of Nottingham. He was also,
at the same time, sworn a member of the privy council, and, contrary to
general custom, became a member of the cabinet. During the unsettled
state of the ministry in 1757, his lordship held, for a few months, the
office of chancellor of the exchequer, and during that period he
effected a coalition of parties, which led to the formation of the
administration of his rival Pitt. The same year, on the retirement of
Lord Hardwicke, he declined the offer of the great seal, which he did
twice afterwards. During the Rockingham administration in 1765, Lord
Mansfield acted for a short time with the opposition, especially as
regards the bill for repealing the stamp act. As a judge his conduct was
visited with the severe animadversions of Junius, and made the subject
of much unmerited attack in both houses of parliament. He was uniformly
a friend to religious toleration, and on various occasions set himself
against vexatious prosecutions founded upon oppressive laws. On the
other hand, he incurred much popular odium by maintaining that, in cases
of libel, the jury were only judges of the fact of publication, and had
nothing to do with the law, as to libel or not. This was particularly
shown in the case of the trial of the publishers of Junius’ letter to
the king.
With regard to his thrice
refusal of the great seal, Lord Campbell, in his Lives of the Chief
Justices of the King’s Bench (vol. iii. p. 469), says, “In 1770, the
king and the duke of Grafton, repeatedly urged Lord Mansfield to become
lord chancellor, but whatever his inclination may have been when Lord
Bute was minister, in the present rickety state of affairs he
peremptorily refused the office, and suggested that the great seal
should be given to Charles Yorke, who had been afraid that he would
snatch it from him. By Lord Mansfield’s advice it was that the king sent
for Charles Yorke, and entered into that unfortunate negotiation with
him which terminated so fatally – occasioning the comparison between
this unhappy man, destroyed by gaining his wish, and Semele perishing by
the lightning she had longed for. For some months the chief justice
presided on the woolsack as speaker of the House of Lords, and exercised
almost all the functions belonging to the office of the Lord
Chancellor.”
[portrait of William Murray 1st earl of Mansfield]
In October 1776, having
been previously created a knight of the Thistle, Lord Mansfield was
advanced to the dignity of an earl of the United Kingdom by the title of
earl of Mansfield, with remainder to the Stormont family, as he had no
issue of his own. During the famous London riots of June 1780, his house
in Bloomsbury Square was attacked and set fire to be the mob, in
consequence of his having voted in favour of the bill for the relief of
the Roman Catholics, and all his furniture, pictures, books,
manuscripts, and other valuables, were entirely consumed. His lordship
himself, it is said, made his escape in disguise, before the flames
burst out. He declined the offer of compensation from government for the
destruction of his property. The infirmities of age compelled him, June
3, 1788, to resign the office of chief-justice, which he had filled with
distinguished reputation for thirty-two years. The latter part of his
life was spent in retirement, principally at his seat at Caen Wood, near
Hampstead. He died march 20, 1793, and was buried in Westminster Abbey.
The earldom, which was granted again by a new patent in July 1792,
descended to his nephew, Viscount Stormont (See STORMONT, Viscount of.)
A life of Lord Mansfield, by Holliday, was published in 1797, and
another, by Thomas Roscoe, appeared in ‘The Lives of British Lawyers,’
in Lardner’s Cyclopaedia.
MURRAY, LORD GEORGE,
lieutenant-general of the rebel Highland army in 1745-6, was the fourth
son of the first duke of Athol, and brother of the second duke. Born in
1705, he took a share in the insurrection of 1715, though then but ten
years old, and he was one of the few persons who joined the Spanish
forces which were defeated at Glenshiel in 1719. He afterwards served
several years as an officer in the king of Sardinia’s army; but having
obtained a pardon he returned from exile, and was presented to George I.
by his brother the duke of Athol. He joined Prince Charles at Perth in
September 1745, and was immediately appointed lieutenant-general of the
insurgent forces. The battle of Preston, where he commanded the left
wing of the prince’s army, was, in a great measure, gained through his
personal intrepidity. “Lord George,” says the chevalier Johnstone, in
his ‘Memoirs of the Rebellion,’ “at the head of the first line, did not
give the enemy time to recover from their panic. He advanced with such
rapidity that General Cope had hardly time to form his troops in order
of battle when the Highlanders rushed upon them, sword in hand, and the
English cavalry was instantly thrown into confusion.”
On the advance of the
rebel army into England, Lord George had the command of the blockade of
Carlisle, which soon surrendered. Owing to the intrigues of Murray of
Broughton, secretary to the prince, whose “unbounded ambition,” we are
told, “from the beginning aimed at nothing less than the whole direction
and management of every thing,” Lord George was induced, at this time,
to resign his command as one of the lieutenant-generals of the army,
acquainting the prince that thenceforward he would serve as a volunteer.
At the siege of Carlisle, the duke of Perth had acted as principal
commander, and Lord George, it was thought, was not willing to serve
under him for the rest of the campaign. The duke, however, subsequently
declined the principal command, when Lord George, who had resumed his
place, became general of the army under the prince.
He was the first to
recommend the retrograde movement from Derby, of which he offered to
undertake the conduct. In that memorable retreat he commanded the
rear-guard, and contrived to keep the English forces effectually in
check. Being delayed by the breaking down of some baggage wagons, the
enemy came upon him at Clifton in Cumberland. His force consisted of
about a thousand men, and he applied to the prince, who was then at
Penrith with the main body of the army, for a reinforcement. Instead of
receiving it, however, orders were sent to him to pursue his retreat;
but, after requesting the messenger to keep secret the orders he had
brought, he determined to attack the enemy with what force he had. He,
therefore, drew up his troops in order of battle, and the English, under
the duke of Cumberland, came up just as the sun was setting. After
making his hasty arrangements, which were not completed till it was
quite dark, he made a powerful charge upon the English, lighted by the
moon which broke at intervals through the dark clouds. The English
cavalry were forced back with a severe loss, while the Highlanders lost
but twelve men.
At the battle of Falkirk,
Lord George had the command of the right wing, and took his place at the
head of the Macdonalds of Keppoch, with his drawn sword in his hand, and
his target on his arm. When the English dragoons came within ten or
twelve paces of him, he gave orders to fire. “The cavalry closing their
ranks, which were opened by this discharge,” says Johnstone, “put spurs
to their horses, and rushed upon the Highlanders at a hard trot,
breaking their ranks, and throwing down everything before them. A most
extraordinary combat followed. The Highlanders, stretched upon the
ground, thrust their dirks into the bellies of the horses; some seized
the riders by their clothes, dragged them down, and stabbed them with
their dirks; several of them again used pistols, but a few of them had
sufficient space to handle their swords.” This victory, like that at
Preston, was, in a great measure, achieved by the personal bravery of
Lord George Murray, though the prince himself commanded.
On arriving at Inverness,
Lord George received information of various cruelties practiced by the
English troops on the people of Athol. He “set off instantly,” says
Johnstone, “with the clan of Athol, to take vengeance for these
outrages, and he conducted his march so well, passing through byeways
across the mountains, that the enemy had no information of his approach.
Having planned his march so as to arrive at Athol in the beginning of
the night, the detachment separated, dividing itself into small parties,
every gentleman taking the shortest road to his own house,” and in this
way all the English were surprised at their posts. Many were put to the
sword, and about 300 were made prisoners. Sir Andrew Agnew, who held the
castle of Blair, marched out with a detachment to ascertain who they
were that had attacked his posts, but owing to the precautions taken by
Lord George, he returned to the castle, without venturing on an attack.
Lord George then invested the castle, which he blockaded, and the
garrison, reduced to great distress from want of provisions, were
expected soon to surrender, when his lordship received an order from the
prince to return to Inverness, in consequence of the advance of the duke
of Cumberland.
It was Lord George Murray
who proposed the night march to Nairn, the evening before the battle of
Culloden, with the view of surprising the army of the duke of
Cumberland. He led the van for that attack, but finding that the rear of
the Highlanders did not come up in time, he at once advised a retreat.
At the battle of Culloden Lord George commanded the right wing of the
prince’s army. The English artillery was rapidly thinning his ranks when
he gave orders to charge. The first line of the English army reeled and
gave way before them. But their opponents were so numerous that before
the Highlanders could reach the second line of the English they were
entirely destroyed. On this occasion Lord George displayed all his
former heroism. While advancing towards the second line, in attempting
to dismount from his horse, which had become unmanageable, he was
thrown; but, recovering himself, he ran to the rear and brought up two
or three regiments from the second line of the Highlanders, to support
the first; but although they gave their fire, nothing could be done, --
all was lost.
After their defeat, Lord
George and the other chiefs who remained with the army retired to
Ruthven, where they assembled a force of about 3,000 men, but two or
three days after the battle they received orders from the prince to
disperse. His lordship had written to Charles, pointing out the
principal causes which had led to the loss of the battle, and requesting
him to accept of the resignation of his commission, but when he found
that it was the intention of the prince to depart for France, he sent a
message to him earnestly dissuading him from such a course, and advising
him to remain in Scotland and try another campaign. His maintained that
the Highlanders “could have made a summer’s campaign without the risk of
any misfortune;” and “though they had neither money nor magazines, they
would not have starved in that season of the year so long as there were
sheep and cattle.”
On the prince’s escape,
Lord George withdrew to the Continent, and having spent some years in
France and Italy, died in Holland on the 8th July 1760. His character is
thus sketched by Johnstone: -- “Lord George Murray, who had the charge
of all the details of our army, and who had the sole direction of it,
possessed a natural genius for military operations; and was a man of
surprising talents, which had they been cultivated by the study of
military tactics, would unquestionably have rendered him one of the
greatest generals of his age. He was tall and robust, and brave in the
highest degree; conducting the Highlanders in the most heroic manner,
and always the first to rush, sword in hand, into the midst of the
enemy. He used to say, when we advanced to the charge, ‘I do not ask
you, my lads, to go before, but merely to follow me.’ He slept little,
was continually occupied with all manner of details; and was,
altogether, most indefatigable, combining and directing alone all our
operations: -- in a word, he was the only person capable of conducting
our army. He was vigilant, active, and diligent; his plans were always
judiciously formed, and he carried them promptly and vigorously into
execution. However, with an infinity of good qualities, he was not
without his defects: -- proud, haughty, blunt, and imperious, he wished
to have the exclusive ordering of everything, and, feeling his
superiority, he would listen to no advice. Still, it must be owned, that
he had no coadjutor capable of advising him, and his having so
completely the confidence of his soldiers enabled him to perform
wonders.”
MURRAY, ALEXANDER,
D.D., a celebrated self-taught philologist, was born at Dunkitterick, in
the parish of Minnigaff, stewartry of Kirkcudbright, October 22, 1775.
His father was a humble Galloway shepherd, an occupation followed by his
ancestors for several generations, and for which he himself was
originally designed. He was taught to read by his father, who was in his
seventieth year at the time of his birth. The method which the old man
adopted was to draw the figures of the letters on an old wool card with
the ends of the burnt roots of the heather that grew on the hills. After
thus learning the letters by means of the burnt sticks, he was advanced
to the catechism, which was the child’s primer in those days. Then he
somehow obtained a New Testament, and afterwards a whole Bible, by going
to a place where an old tattered copy of it lay, which he carried off
bit by bit. In the wild solitary glen where his father lived, he made
himself master of the whole contents of the sacred volume, and also
devoured every printed scrap of paper on which he could lay his hands,
and so strong was his memory that even when he was but a boy he could
repeat the names of the patriarchs and scripture characters from Adam to
our Saviour without omitting one. When about seven years old, he was
employed on the hills in herding sheep. The poverty of the family, and
the remote situation of their hut, prevented his being sent early to
school, and in fact he would never have obtained any regular instruction
at all, had not a brother of his mother, named William Cochrane,
offered, in May 1784, to be at the expense of sending him to school, and
boarding him for a short time in New Galloway. Bad health, however,
obliged him to return home before he had been six months at school, and
for more than four years after this he had no opportunity of resuming
his attendance. In the meantime he was employed as usual as a shepherd
boy, and for about three years the Bible, and what “ballads and penny
stories” he could pick up, formed his only reading.
In the end of 1787 he
engaged to teach throughout the winter the children of two neighbouring
farmers, and as a remuneration, he received sixteen shillings, part of
which he immediately laid out in the purchase of books. Soon after he
began to give irregular attendance for a short time at the school of
Minnigaff, chiefly for the purpose of improving his arithmetic, with the
view of becoming a merchant’s clerk. In 1790, having obtained a cheap
copy of Ainsworth’s Dictionary, he began the study of Latin, and in May
of that year commenced to learn French. In the summer of 1791 he again
attended school for about three months, and read with avidity whatever
books he could anywhere borrow, whether in English, French, Latin,
Greek, or Hebrew, for so great was his application, that he had made
himself master of all these languages within the space of only about
eighteen months, and that chiefly be his own unaided exertions.
In the winter of 1792-3
he again engaged in teaching, when he received, as he informs us, for
his labours, about thirty shillings. During the same winter he went in
the evenings to a school at Bridgend of Cree, where he remained for
about three months and a half. The whole period of his school
attendance, scattered over a space of eight years, did not exceed
thirteen months; but every spare hour was given to study, and as he
himself tells us, French, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew occupied all his
leisure time. In 1791 he had made himself acquainted with the Abyssinian
alphabet, from an inaccurate copy which he transcribed from an odd
volume of the Universal History. The Arabic letters he had learned
previously from Robertson’s Hebrew Grammar. He had purchased the same
year, for a trifle, a manuscript volume of the Lectures of Arnold
Drackenburg, a German professor, on the lives and writings of the Roman
authors, from Livius Andronicus to Quintillian, which he afterwards
translated, and in 1794 offered his version to the booksellers at
Dumfries, with a number of poems which he had composed, chiefly in the
Scottish dialect, but neither of the two booksellers in that town would
undertake the publication. During this visit to Dumfries he was
introduced to Burns, the poet, who treated him with great kindness, and
gave him some useful hints as to his poetry.
The fame of his
extraordinary acquirements having extended to Edinburgh, in November
1794 he was invited to that city, when he underwent an examination
before Principal Baird and two of the other city clergymen. The extent
and accuracy of his classical attainments made such an impression on
these gentlemen, that they exerted their influence to procure for him a
free attendance at the classes in the university, and contributed to his
means of subsistence during the first two years of his academic career.
At the end of that period he obtained a bursary, or exhibition, from the
city, and soon after was able to support himself by private teaching. He
continued to devote himself with all his wonted enthusiasm to the study
of languages, and after having attained to a knowledge of all those
spoken in Europe, he commenced his investigations into the Oriental
tongues, and of the six or seven dialects of the Abyssinian or Ethiopic
language, in particular, he made himself completely master. The latter
circumstance induced Mr. Constable, the published, to employ him in 1802
to superintend a new edition of ‘Bruce’s Travels to discover the Source
of the Nile,’ which appeared in seven volumes 8vo, in 1805, with a Life
of the author prefixed, and a mass of illustrative notes. The Life of
Bruce he afterwards enlarged and published separately. He had previously
contributed several miscellaneous pieces to the Scots Magazine, of which
he was at one time editor.
Having passed through the
usual college course, to qualify him for the ministry in the Church of
Scotland, he was appointed in 1806 assistant and successor to the Rev.
Mr. Muirhead, minister of Urr, in the stewartry of Kirkcudbright, and on
the death of the latter in 1808, he succeeded to the full incumbency of
the parish. In 1812 he became a candidate for the vacant professorship
of Oriental Languages in the university of Edinburgh, and among the
numerous testimonials of his qualifications which were published on the
occasion, was one from Mr. Salt, formerly envoy to Abyssinia, whose
admiration of the deep erudition and extensive research displayed in his
edition of Bruce’s Travels, caused him, in his return to England in
February 1811, to recommend him to the marquis of Wellesley, “as the
only person in the British dominions” adequate to translate an Ethiopic
letter which he had brought from the governor of Tigre to George III. In
remembrance of Mr. Murray’s services in translating this letter, a
pension of £80 a-year was after his death granted by his majesty to his
widow. He was elected professor of Oriental Languages on July 8, by a
majority of two votes, and a few days thereafter the senatus of the
university conferred on him the degree of D.D. He was not destined,
however, to occupy long a chair which he was so admirably qualified to
fill. On October 31 he entered upon the discharge of his professional
duties in a weak state of health, and continued with the utmost ardour
to teach his classes during the winter. At the commencement of the
session he published his ‘Outlines of Oriental Philology,’ an elementary
work, designed for the use of his students. In the beginning of February
a new impression of his edition of Bruce’s Travels also made its
appearance. Soon after, his illness assumed such an alarming aspect as
to prevent his lecturing, though he continued his literary labours to
the last, having been the very day before his death engaged nearly
twelve hours in arranging his papers, &c. He died on the morning of
April 15, 1813, in the 37th year of his age. In his latter years he had
written a work of great learning, entitled ‘History of European
languages,’ which was published after his death in 2 vols. 8vo, under
the auspices of Sir Henry Moncrieff and Dr. Scott of Corstorphine. By
his wife, whom he married while residing at Urr, Dr. Murray had a son
and a daughter, the latter of whom died in 1821. Subjoined is his
portrait, from a painting by Geddes, engraved by Burnet:
[portrait of Alexander Murray, D.D.]
MURRAY, SIR GEORGE,
an able military officer and diplomatist, the second son of Sir William
Murray, the fifth baronet of Ochtertyre, was born at the family seat in
Perthshire, February 6, 1772. He was educated at the high school and
university of Edinburgh, and on 12th March 1789, was gazetted an ensign
in the 71st foot. Soon after, he removed to the 34th regiment, and in
June 1790 to the 3d Guards. In 1793 he was in the army under the duke of
York which was employed against the French in Flanders, and in January
1794 he was promoted to a lieutenancy, with the rank of captain. In
April of that year he returned to England, but having rejoined the army
in Flanders during the summer, he was present in the retreat through
Holland and Germany. In 1795 he was appointed aide-de-camp to
Major-general Sir Alexander Campbell, on the staff of Lord Moira’s army
in the expedition intended for Quiberon. In the autumn of the same year,
he proceeded to the West Indies under Sir Ralph Abercromby, but in
consequence of ill health he soon returned, and he served on the staff
in England and Ireland during the years 1797 and 1798. In August 1799 he
was appointed a captain in the guards, with the rank of
lieutenant-colonel. He participated in all the dangers and disasters of
the expedition to Holland that year, and was wounded at the Helder. He
was soon, however, able to proceed with his regiment to Cork, whence he
embarked with it to Gibraltar, as part of the force under the orders of
Sir Ralph Abercromby. Having been placed in the quarter-master-general’s
department, he went to Egypt for the purpose of making arrangements
preparatory to the celebrated expedition against the French in that
country, and while there he displayed so much gallantry and skill that
the Turkish government conferred upon him the order of the crescent,
second class.
He was present in every
one of the engagements in Egypt, at Marmorice and Aboukir, at Rosetta
and Rahmanieh, at Cairo and Alexandria, and had the good fortune to
escape without a wound. In 1802 he went from Egypt to the west Indies,
and remained there a year as adjutant-general to the British forces in
those colonies. On his return to England, he filled a situation at the
Horse Guards. In 1804 he was appointed deputy quarter-master-general in
Ireland. In 1806 he was engaged in active service in the expedition to
Stralsund, but that design was rendered abortive by the successes of the
French in Poland. About two years thereafter, Colonel Murray was
intrusted with a diplomatic mission to Sweden, and being there at the
time that the expedition under Sir John Moore went to that country, he
received from that distinguished commander the appointment of
quarter-master-general. Very soon afterwards, the troops under sir John
Moore joined the army in Portugal, and Colonel Murray, who went along
with them, served all through the peninsular war. On new year’s day
1812, he became a major-general, and on 9th August 1813 he was appointed
colonel of the 7th battalion of the 60th regiment. In 1617 he was
removed to the 72d foot, and on September 11, 1813, was nominated a
knight of the Bath, before the enlargement of that order.
After serving for a short
time as adjutant-general in Ireland, Sir George was appointed governor
of the Canadas. He had not been long there when the secretary of state
announced to him that the Emperor Napoleon had landed at Cannes from
Elba. He had the choice of either remaining in Canada, or returning to
Europe, to engage in active service. He preferred the latter, but the
delay occasioned by the embarkation of a large body of troops, and the
slow progress made in sailing with a fleet of transports, prevented his
arriving in time, and he did not join the duke of Wellington’s army till
it had nearly reached Paris, after the battle of Waterloo.
During the stay of our
army of occupation in France, Sir George remained with them, with the
local rank of lieutenant-general. While in Paris he received seven
orders of knighthood, besides those conferred by his own sovereign, so
highly were his character and services held in estimation by continental
monarchs. He became a knight Grand Cross of Hanover; knight Grand Cross
of Leopold, St. Alexander Newski, and the Red Eagle; a commander of the
Tower and Sword, Maximillian Joseph, and St. Henry.
On the return of the army
of occupation to England in 1817, Sir George Murray was appointed
governor of Edinburgh castle, but he held that office only for a year,
as on 18th August 1819, he was nominated governor of the Royal Military
College at Woolwich. On 14th June 1820, the university of Oxford
conferred on him the degree of D.C.L., and in January 1824 he was chosen
a fellow of the Royal Society. In September 1823 he had been appointed
to the command of the 42d foot, and on 6th March following he became
lieutenant-general of the ordnance. The same year (1824) he was chosen
M.P. for the county of Perth. At this time he filled the office of
commander of the forces in Ireland.
At the general election
of 1826, he was again returned for Perthshire. In January 1828, when the
duke of Wellington became prime minister, Sir George Murray was
appointed secretary of state for the colonies; on which occasion he
resigned the command of the army in Ireland, and was sworn a member of
the privy council. From that period he distinguished himself as a ready
and fluent speaker in the House of Commons. He supported the Roman
Catholic emancipation bill of 1829, and after the Whig government came
into power in November 1830, he was one of the principal members of the
opposition. In that year, and again in 1831, he was re-elected for
Perthshire, but on the dissolution of parliament in 1832, after the
passing of the Reform Bill, he was defeated by the earl of Ormelie,
afterwards marquis of Breadalbane. In 1834 his lordship became a member
of the House of Lords, and Sir George Murray was again elected M.P. for
Perthshire.
On the death of Lord
Lynedoch in 1843, he succeeded him as colonel of the 1st or Royal
regiment of foot. He attained the rank of lieutenant-general May 27,
1825, and that of general, November 23, 1841. He was editor of ‘The Duke
of Marlborough’s Letters and Despatches,’ from 1702 to 1712, which were
published in 1845. He will be remembered as a successful soldier, an
able minister, and a skilful and fluent debater. He died in London 26th
July 1846, aged 74, and was buried at Kensal Green. At the time of his
death he was governor of Fort George and president of the Royal
Geographical Society. He had married in 1826, in the 54th year of his
age, Lady Louisa Erskine, sister of the marquis of Angelesey and widow
of Lieutenant-general Sir James Erskine, baronet. Lady Louisa was then
48. She died 23d January 1842. They had one daughter, who married H. G.
Boyce, Esq., of the 2d life guards, and died in 1849.
Sir James
Murray
1837-1915
Main author of the Oxford English Dictionary
See also his book on
The Dialect of the Southern Counties of
Scotland |
