Category: AtoZChallenge

F is for Fornication, in Fossoway

7/4/2016

One of the most common themes you'll find in Kirk Session records is fornication: sex outside marriage. The records are full of women (and usually, but not always, men) being summoned to explain their actions. While the Session's disapproval of such behaviour is clear - sometimes abundantly so - what is often overlooked in the context of stern rebukes, admonitions and public reproach, is that, as well as their role in policing sexual mores in the context of an often stern, austere religious outlook, the Kirk Sessions had another responsibility, which weighed heavily on their minds in such cases: they wanted to make sure where possible that children born to unmarried mothers would not become a burden on the parish. It's worth bearing that in mind if you come across an ancestor dragged before the Session for a case of fornication.

Many fornication cases were dealt with in an almost offhand way: the parties would be summoned, would confess their guilt, and would be rebuked, sometimes before the whole Congregation, but often in a less publicly conspicuous manner, before the Session itself.

Other cases, however, were not so straightforward. For one thing, cases of adultery were treated much more seriously, and would frequently be referred to the Presbytery for their advice (which as often as not, amounted to telling the Kirk Session "You deal with it"!). From a researcher's point of view, though, it's much more interesting when the accused man denies paternity. When this happened, the mother and alleged father could call witnesses to provide evidence in support of their claims, and these can be truly fascinating, with cases sometimes dragging on for months.

The following case from Fossoway gives a good illustration of the process:

CH2/163/4 p. 14-15
Church of Fossoway, 5th Feb[ruary] 1826
[…]
Compeared Marg[are]t Wright residing at Powmill, and confessed herself to be with child, and being interrogated, gave up John Young, lately residing in this Parish, and now in the Parish of Orwell, as the father, and that the first time he was guilty with her was on the evening of the Alloa August market.
The Session direct their Clerk to request the Session of Orwell to cause the said John Young to be summoned to attend the Session here on this day two weeks, and as the woman mentions that he declared to her that so soon as he should hear of her giving up him as the father of her child he would immediately leave the country, the Session recommend to her to lose no time in making Oath to this effect before one of His Majesty’s Justices of the Peace, in order that the proper steps may be taken to prevent his departure before an end be put to this business. Closed w[i]t[h] prayer.

So the putative father, John Young, basically tells Margaret Wright "If you tell anyone I'm the father, I'll run away." Not a good look. Two weeks later, though, John does appear, and denies everything:

CH2/163/4 p. 15-16
Church of Fossoway 19th Feb[ruary][ruar]y 1826
[…]
Compeared in consequence of summons John Young, who on the 5th Febr[uar]y had been given up by Marg[are]t Wright as the father of a child of which she is pregnant in fornication. The declaration of Marg[are]t Wright was then read over to him. And being solemnly warned by the Moderator to declare the truth as in the presence of God and interrogated, denied being the father of the child, or that he has been guilty with her.
The Session in these circumstances direct John Young to wait upon them again on Sabbath next, and farther direct Marg[are]t Wright to be cited to attend, in order that the parties may be confronted together.
Closed with prayer

A week later, Margaret confronts John in front of the Session, but John continues to deny everything. Margaret is given the opportunity to call witnesses, who are then summoned to appear in two weeks time:

CH2/163/4 p. 16-17
Church of Fossoway, 26th Feb[ruary] 1826
[…]
Compeared John Young and Marg[are]t Wright, and being interrogated separately and then in the presence of each other, they both looking one another in the face, adhered to their former declarations, Marg[are]t Wright in accusing John Young as the father of her child and John Young in denying having ever been guilty with her. The Moderator then enquired at Marg[are]t Wright whether she could bring forward any evidence to substantiate her accusation, she named for that purpose Robert Ramsay residing at Craiglawhill, and Catherine Blackwood, wife of George Johnman residing at Crosshead Village. The Session direct the above named individuals to be summoned to give evidence in this case on Sabbath the 12th March in the Church immediately after Sermon, and the Parties are cited apud acta to attend.

Two weeks later, Margaret gives her version of events:

CH2/163/4 p. 18-22
Church of Fossoway, 12th March 1826
[…]
Compeared Marg[are]t Wright and continued to accuse John Young as the father of her child. Declared that the first time she saw him at Alloa Aug[us]t Fair, was in a public house, about eight o’clock in the evening. That the did not stay long in the public house, but came away home in company with some others belonging to the neighbourhood as far as Forestmill, when they all went into a public house. That John Young and she came away alone as far as Woodside where they sat down together. That there then came up to them several persons who endeavoured to take her from John Young and that in the course of the struggle betwixt John Young and these persons, she came away alone, but shortly observing that she had forgot her bundle and umbrella she returned for them to the spot where John Young and she had been sitting. She again came away alone, and before reaching Blairngone, she was overtaken by Peter Cree who accompanied her as the plantation betwixt Devonshaw and Gartwhynean where he left her and she does not know what became of him afterwards. That when she reached home, being again alone, the door was locked and during the time she was standing at the window, the door having not yet been opened, John Young came up and joined her. That some others she thinks came up about the same time, but thinks that they came no farther at that time than the planting and that they went as she supposes into it. That John Young and she then went a little down the road leading to Garthwhynean, on the side of which they sat down, and that he was there guilty with her. That they afterwards returned to the house, when her father opened the door, and John Young went in along with her. That he sat in the house only a short time, she accompanying him only the length of the door. Declares the he continued to frequent her company till Kinross Luke’s fair, when she told him that she was with child. That he promised to come and confess his guilt to her father on the following Tuesday, but that he did not come.

This contains fascinating detail about her walk home, a distance of around 10 miles. (You can see the route on a modern map here - opens in a new window.)

John Young being then called, compeared, and continued to deny all guilt with Marg[are]t Wright. He was then heard in explanation of his conduct regarding Marg[are]t Wright at and after leaving Alloa Fair, and the statement made by him exactly corresponded with that made by Marg[are]t Wright, with the exception that instead of meeting with her on the day in question in a public house, he met her in the first instance on the street and afterwards in a public house. Denies that he joined her at her own house, or that he saw her again that evening at all, but declares that Rob[er]t Ramsay joined him a little west of Blairngone, with whom he came all the way till the separation of the roads, which is at Powmill Smithy, and considerably east of Marg[are]t Wright’s father’s house. Denies that he has ever been in her father’s house before or since the day in question, but admits that in passing he has frequently stopped and chatted with her at the door.

Margaret then calls her first witness, Robert Ramsay, from Craiglawhill:

Robert Ramsay, a witness cited for Marg[are]t Wright, unmarried, and aged [space left blank] years, who being solemnly sworn, purged of malice, and partial counsel and interrogated depones, that on the day in question he met with John Young in Alloa first on the street. That on leaving Alloa and going so far as Forest Mill the deponent went into a public house. Depones that he was there in company with John Young and Marg[are]t Wright and others. That after leaving the public house he did not see John Young again till he was considerably west of Blairngone. Depones that John Young and the Dep[onen]t went on together by themselves to the west side of the Devonshaw quarry when they came up with David and Robert Morison, who came along with them till they arrived at the houses at Crossgates, when John Young fell behind, and the Dep[onen]t saw no more of him that night. Depones that he was joined about the Devonshaw and Gartwhynean march by Peter Cree, who together with the Morisons and the Dep[onen]t came within a little distance of the Powmill Smithy, when Peter Cree and the Dep[onen]t sat down for ten minutes, but that John Young did not again come up with them. And that all this truth as the Dep[onen]t shall answer to God.
Signed Robert Ramsay

Robert can't prove that Margaret is telling the truth. Margaret's second witness is more forthcoming, providing hearsay evidence that John admitted having been with Margaret, but claiming he wasn't the only one:

Comp[eare]d Catharine Blackwood, a witness in this case cited for Marg[are]t Wright, married and aged 23 years, who being solemnly sworn &c and interrogated Depones that since it was reported that Marg[are]t Wright was with child, John Young called on the Dep[onen]t and said that farmers and farmers’ sons had been with Marg[are]t Wright as well as he, and this is truth as the Dep[onen]t shall answer to God, and declares that she cannot write.
Signed Peter Brydie Mod[erato]r
The Session delay the farther consideration of this case till this day’s two weeks.

Over the course of the next week, rumour evidently reaches members of the Kirk Session that Catharine knows more than she told them, because we read:

CH2/163/4 p. 23
Church of Fossoway 19th March
[…]
The Session next took into consideration the case of John Young and Marg[are]t Wright. It being reported that Catharine Blackwood who gave evidence in this case on Sabbath last, can throw light of this business additional to what is contained in the evidence already emitted by her agree to meet at Easter Gartwhynean on the 7th April next, in order to re-examine her, and she is appointed to be summoned to attend the Session at that time.
Closed with prayer

Sure enough, a few weeks later, Catharine changes her evidence:

CH2/163/4 p. 24-26
Easter Gartwhynean 7th April 1826

The Session proceeded to the consideration of the case of John Young and Marg[are]t Wright.

John Young and Marg[are]t Wright being called compeared, and both adhered to their former declarations.

Catharine Blackwood, who has given evidence in this case on the 12th March last being again called compeared. Depones that John Young did speak to the Deponent with regard to Marg[are]t Wright’s being with child in presence of Isable Blackwood the Dep[onen]t’s sister. Depones that this conversation took place on New Hanselmonday last. Depones that John Young came into the Dep[onen]t’s house and began to swear seemingly in a passion because the Dep[onen]t had said to him that he was blamed as being the father of Marg[are]t Wright’s child. Depones that he then on leaving the house said to the Dep[onen]t that farmers and farmers’ sons had been with Marg[are]t Wright as well as him. Depones that John Young was in the Dep[onen]t’s house not above ten minutes, and that the Horse and Cart which he had with him was going forward in the meantime on the road without a guide. Depones that she mentioned this conversation afterwards to her brother-in-law Robert Johnman and that she used to him the very words which she now does, but does not remember of mentioning the matter to her father-in-law at all. Depones that she mentioned this conversation also to Ann Morgan and Helen Morgan. Depones that John Young said to the Dep[onen]t on the same occasion that he had been in Glasgow and Edinburgh and that he had not met with a damneder whore than Marg[are]t Wright. Depones that the conversation betwixt John Young and the Dep[onen]t was wholly taken up about Marg[are]t Wright’s being with child. Depones that it was after the Dep[onen]t had blamed his as being the father of Marg[are]t Wright’s child that he began to swear. And that all this is truth as the Dep[onen]t shall answer to God, and declares that she cannot write.
Peter Brydie Mod[erato]r

If there was any doubt as to what John meant when he claimed that "farmers and farmers' sons had been with Margaret", that doubt has been removed. John has reverted to name calling, although by so doing, he allegedly admits to having been with Margaret himself. Still, though, he persists in denying everything to the Session:

John Young states that about the end of Harvest he came west in James Taylor’s cart as far as the road which leads off to the Cocklaws. That this might be nearly ten o’clock at night. That he saw Marg[are]t Wright’s door open. That he tapped on the window, but that Marg[are]t Wright did not make her appearance. From the circumstance he is of opinion that she was engaged with some other person. That he then returned home without making any enquiry whether Marg[are]t Wright was any wise engaged with any other person or not.
The Session delay the farther consideration of this case till a future opportunity, of which due notice will be given to the Parties. Closed with Prayer.

A month later, though, John appears before the Session once again, and has evidently had a change of heart. Whether he's had pangs of conscience, or has been persuaded to admit his actions by some unknown person, John recants his earlier evidence unequivocally:

CH2/163/4 p. 28
Church of Fossoway 11th May 1826
[…]
Compeared voluntarily before the Session John Young and confessed himself guilty of the Sin of fornication with Marg[are]t Wright. Acknowledges the paternity of her child, and expressed his regret that he had aggravated his sin by so long persisting in his denial of it.
The Session delay the consideration of his case till this day two weeks, and John Young being admonished by the Mod[erato]r to lay his sin to heart in the mean time was dismissed.
Closed with Prayer.

There's no record of the Session meeting two weeks later, but instead six weeks later John appears before the Session to be rebuked pro primo (literally: for the first time):

CH2/163/4 p. 28
Church of Fossoway 25th June 1826
[…]
John Young rebuked pro primo
Comp[eare]d John Young guilty of fornication with Marg[are]t Wright, who having professed sorrow for his sin, was rebuked by the Moderator, and directed to continue his appearances on this day two weeks. Closed with prayer.

Two weeks later, John appears pro secundo ('for the second time'), is once again rebuked, and is ordered to produce a certificate of good behaviour from the parish of Kinross, where he now lives:

CH2/163/4 p. 29
Church of Fossoway 9th July 1826
John Young rebuked pro secundo
Comp[eare]d pro secundo John Young, guilty of fornication with Marg[are]t Wright, who having again professed sorrow for his sin, and resolutions of amendment, was directed to procure a certificate from Kinross, for the time he has resided in that Parish, and lodge the same with the Session here on this day two weeks.
Closed with prayer

Another two weeks later, John returns with a note from one of the Kinross elders, and is ordered to appear for public rebuke before the full congregation:

CH2/163/4 p. 29
Church of Fossoway 23d July 1826
[…]
Comp[eare]d John Young, and produced a line from Mr Joseph Hardie, one of the Elders of Kinross, certifying that he had known John Young since he came to reside in the Parish, and that so far as he knew his behaviour had been decent. He was then examined as to his knowledge, and was directed to compear before the Congregation on this day two weeks, in order to be restored to communion with the Church.

Finally, six months after the case began, John is made to appear as a penitent before the congregation, is admonished by the Moderator (in this case, the Parish Minister), and is restored to full membership of the Church:

CH2/163/4 p. 30
Church of Fossoway, 6th Aug[us]t 1826
[…]
John Young absolved
Comp[eare]d publicly John Young guilty of fornication with Marg[are]t Wright, who having been solemnly addressed by the Moderator as to his future conduct, was restored to Communion to the Church.

There is one further postscript, in the Cash book for Fossoway parish:

CH2/163/6 p. 94
1826
Aug 6 To fine of John Young for fornication with Marg[are]t Wright 5/-

This illustrates another purpose of disciplinary proceedings - to raise money, which in most cases went towards the Poor Funds maintained by each parish.

We are gradually rolling out a lookup service for Kirk Session records across Scotland. If your ancestors were from Fossoway, you can see the records we can check for you here. For other parts of Scotland, start here.

1 Comment

E is for Education, in Ellon

6/4/2016

1 Comment

The Reformation in Scotland placed great emphasis on education. In 1560, the First Book of Discipline established the ideal of universal education, of a school in every parish. Although the ideal was never actually realised in practice, it remained a worthy objective.

As a consequence, many wealthy individuals left legacies for educational purposes. Some, such as George Heriot in Edinburgh, left money to establish educational institutions for poor children, often referred to slightly confusingly as Hospitals. Others endowed funds to pay school fees for children in a district. One such fund was the Milne Bequest in the parish of Ellon, Aberdeenshire. The Parliamentary Educational Endowments (Scotland) Commission described it thus:

The Milne Bequest, which is said to be dated in 1797, but did not come into operation till 1808, its precise date not being ascertainable, but a record of it appearing in the kirk session minutes under date July 21, 1808, was left by the Rev James Milne, minister of Ellon, ‘for the purpose of educating poor children’. Its amount is nearly £20 of capital, and it is paid to the School Board for the education of poor children.

p. 483, Fourth Report of the Educational Endowments (Scotland) Commission with Evidence and Appendix, Edinburgh, HMSO 1887

The benefactor being a minister, it is perhaps not surprising that operation of the Milne Bequest was placed in the hands of the Kirk Session of Ellon. Fortunately, the elders kept excellent records of payments made under the bequest. The entries for 1862/63 are as follows:

Milne Bequest 1862-63 [NRS Ref CH2/147/9 p 97-98]
Name	Age	Parents or guardian	No of whole family	No under 14 at home	Causes of absence
Allan, Alexander	11	Francis Allan, beadle; Jane Low	five	five	measles
Allan, William	8				measles
Angus, James	11	Elspet Angus or Hay, dom servt
Bowman, Mary	7	Robert Bowman, f s; Jessie Low	seven	six
Bowman, Robert	12				engagement at farm work
Donaldson, George	9	Jean Low, guardian			unwell
Edwards, Isabella	12	Jean Low, guardian
Elrick, Anne	7	James Mackie, guardian
Ewen, Isabella	11	Peter Ewen, ag lab; Jane Taylor	seven	two
Ewen, Peter	13
Gibson, Charles	9	Charles Gibson, f servt; Anne Taylor	six	five	measles
Gibson, Jane	7				measles
Gray, George	8	Alexr Gray, f servt; Margt Kelly	six	five
Gray, Peter	10
Johnston, James	7	Elspet Webster, mother
Kennedy, Mary	9	John James, guardian
Low, Christian	8	George Low, ag lab; Ch Gill	six	four	measles
Low, Margaret	8	Forbes Robertson, step father; Helen Findlay	4	4	diphtheria
Milne, James	8	John Milne, guardian			measles
Mitchell, Francis	7	John Mitchell, ag lab; Jane Lyon	five	five	parental negligence
Mitchell, Margaret	9				parental negligence
Reid, Anne	11	John Reid, ag lab; Anne Coupland	six	six
Reid, Bathia	9
Sheriffs, Elizabeth	13	James Sheriffs, lab; Anne Elrick	four	one	dishealth
Stewart, Charlotte	9	Mary Connon, mother			diphtheria
Sutherland, Catherine	9	George Taylor, guardian			measles
Thom, Anne	8	Alexr Thom, grieve; Mary Wood	ten	four
Thom, Christian	10
Wilson, William	8	John James, guardian
Rae, John	7	Alexr Cruickshank, guardian			fever

The Kirk Session records of Ellon parish include payments made from the Milne Bequest from 1852 to 1880. Apart from the details of ill health as shown above, and the details of guardians of children - presumably orphans - some of the earlier records also include comments on the individual pupils ("giddy, thoughtless", "less fair from want of parental oversight") that offer a unique insight into their characters. You can request a lookup in these and other Ellon parish records here.

1 Comment

D is for Dissenters

5/4/2016

1 Comment

Monday 1st January 1855 is a key date in Scottish genealogy research. That was when the system of statutory registration was introduced, covering - in theory at least - every birth, marriage and death in Scotland. However, if you want to research back before 1855, things get a little trickier. The most commonly used records for tracing Scottish ancestry before statutory registration, are the so called OPRs, or Old Parish Registers. These have been indexed, and are available - for a fee - on the Scotland's People website. However, they only cover the established Church of Scotland. You may have a marriage record (often inaccurately referred to as a certificate) for your ancestors, showing that they were members of a dissenting church.

Scotland's fractious religious history means that historically, many Scots did not belong to the Church of Scotland. There have been numerous schisms over the centuries since the Reformation, as a result of dissent over Church doctrine and practice.

In 1733, Ebenezer Erskine, William Wilson, Alexander Moncrieff and James Fisher led what became known as the First Secession, forming the Associate Presbytery. A Second Secession led by Thomas Gillespie followed in 1761. In 1820, several of the dissenting groups combined to form the United Secession Church, initially with 261,000 followers in 361 congregations. By 1830, around one in three Scots were members.

But the largest secession from the Church of Scotland came with the Disruption of 1843, when a long-running dispute over patronage (triggered by the 1834 Veto Act of the General Assembly: see our parish records pages for 150,000 free records of heads of families created as a result of this Act) within the Church of Scotland led to the formation of the Free Church of Scotland. Over a third of serving ministers in the established church joined the Free Church, leaving the Church of Scotland as a minority church for the first time.

Most of these various denominations kept registers of the baptisms of the children of members. Many of these registers survive today in Scottish archives. Unfortunately, for the most part they have not been indexed at all, and the registers are not available online, so finding your ancestors can be challenging.

Over the last few months, we have been extracting the pre-1855 entries from many of these registers, and making them available online. These extractions are not just indexes, but full extracts of all the information contained in the registers - not just names and dates, but often home addresses, father's occupations, and in a number of instances additional notes added by the church officers. Many of these registers continue past 1855, but as there are statutory registers from that time on, we have not extracted them. So far, we've extracted the registers listed below. Click on a link to see what names these registers contain - perhaps your ancestors were dissenters?

Aberdeen St Paul Street United Presbyterian, Aberdeenshire

Aberdeen Bon Accord Free Church, Aberdeenshire

Newhills Free Church, Aberdeenshire

Arbroath Erskine United Presbyterian Church, Angus

Dundee Mariners Church, Angus

St George's Free Church Montrose, Angus

Ardrossan St John's Free Church, Ayrshire

Coldingham United Presbyterian Church, Berwickshire

Langton Free Church, Berwickshire

Bruan Free church, Caithness

Canisbay Free Church, Caithness

Lybster Free Church, Caithness

Pulteneytown Free Church, Caithness

Johnstone and Wamphray Free Church, Dumfriesshire

Innerwick Free Church, East Lothian

Edinburgh St Luke's Free Church, Edinburgh

Portobello United Presbyterian Church, Edinburgh

St Georges Free Church, Edinburgh

Dysart Free Church, Fife

St Andrews Martyrs, Fife

Gorbals United Presbyterian Church, Glasgow

Shamrock Street United Presbyterian Church Glasgow, Glasgow

Strachan Free Church, Kincardineshire

Milnathort United Presbyterian, Kinross-shire

Auchencairn Free Church, Kirkcudbrightshire

Dalbeattie Free Church, Kirkcudbrightshire

Tongland and Twynholm Free Church, Kirkcudbrightshire

Blantyre United Presbyterian Church, Lanarkshire

Cambusnethan Associate Church, Lanarkshire

Hamilton St. John's Free Church, Lanarkshire

Roberton United Presbyterian Church, Lanarkshire

Wellwynd United Associate Congregation Airdrie, Lanarkshire

Musselburgh United Presbyterian, Midlothian

Harray Free Church, Orkney

Orphir Free Church, Orkney

Sandwick United Presbyterian Church, Orkney

Stenness Free Church, Orkney

Stromness Free Church, Orkney

Stromness United Presbyterian, Orkney

Aberfeldy Free Church, Perthshire

Alyth Associate Congregation, Perthshire

Blackford Free Church, Perthshire

Perth Free Middle, Perthshire

St Leonards Free Church Perth, Perthshire

Alexandria United Secession Church, Renfrewshire

Erskine Free Church, Renfrewshire

Paisley, Reformed Presbyterian, Renfrewshire

Bowden Free Church, Roxburghshire

Kelso United Presbyterian, Roxburghshire

Denny Free Church, Stirlingshire

Tongue Free Church, Sutherland

Drumore Free Church Kirkmaiden, Wigtownshire

1 Comment

20 free credits for Scotland's People

3/4/2016

0 Comments

Scotland's People website run by the National Records of Scotland is giving away 20 free credits (normal price: £7 for 30 credits). Simply login (you'll have to register first if you haven't already done so), click on Buy more credits at the top right of the screen:

Then use "Scotland" as the Voucher Code.

Searches cost 1 credit for up to 25 results, while viewing images of historical records costs 5 credits (10 credits for wills and testaments).

If there are too many matches for you to buy online (with a surname like Smith, I know how that feels!), or if the record you're interested in is not available on the website, why not ask us about our affordable lookup service?

0 Comments

Birthdays - but which one?

2/4/2016

0 Comments

One of the slightly unusual features of the Scottish system of statutory registration is the Register of Corrected Entries (now known as the Register of Corrections, Etc, or RCE). This allows for errors in original records to be corrected. In modern times, the RCE is a separate volume - the original register is not actually changed; instead a note is added in the margin, with a reference to the RCE.

While the RCE system only applies to statutory registration of births, marriages and deaths, as introduced in Scotland in 1855, it was clearly not without precedent, as the following entry from the Kirk Session of Barony, in Glasgow, shows:

31 October 1832
Compeared Mr John Hamilton who stated to the Session that he had lately discovered that a mistake had been made in the Register of Births belonging to the Parish which related to the recording the date of the birth of his lawful twin children a daughter & son named Mary Ann & John, and which he requested that the Session would have the goodness to get rectified. The mistake was this, that it was recorded, that these children were born on the 10th & 12th of November 1811 years whereas the truth is, that they were born on the 10th and 12th of October 1811. The Session satisfied of the truth of the above statement unanimously agree to Mr Hamilton's request, and do hereby order their Clerk to insert anew the birth of his twin children named Mary Ann & John born on the 10th and 12th October 1811 years, into the Parish Register of Births and Baptisms.
[Glasgow Barony Kirk Session CH2/173/13 p. 89]

Several things stand out from this entry. Firstly, it shows that even contemporary, primary sources can be incorrect: although in this case, it seems that the clerk did change the original register, and a modern researcher would find the correct date (assuming the father was telling the truth). Secondly, you have to wonder how and why the father noticed the error, almost exactly 21 years after the event. Perhaps the children were involved in some legal matter that required them to be 21 years of age, possibly an inheritance. And thirdly, it also inadvertently offers a glimpse into family history as opposed to genealogy: Mary Ann and John were twins, but they were born 2 days apart, suggesting that their mother (unnamed in this entry, but she was Agnes Robertson) must have experienced a lengthy labour of at least 24 hours, more than 35 years before James Young Simpson pioneered the use of anaesthesia in childbirth.

0 Comments

Adultery in Athelstaneford

1/4/2016

2 Comments

The following entries are from Athelstaneford Kirk Session minutes, and the minutes of the Presbytery of Haddington.

Athelstaneford Kirk Session minutes CH2/18/1 p. 180
Athelstaneford 27th April 1834
This day the Session met and being constituted by prayer, compeared Janet Brook charged with being with child. Being interrogated she acknowledged the truth of the charge and declared that Mr Thomas Darling, tenant of West Fortune is the father of the child, with which she has been pregnant eight months. She said that Mr Darling promised to support the child. She was admonished and dismissed. Sederunt closed with prayer.

CH2/18/1 p. 182-185
Athelstaneford 11th July 1834
The Kirk Session of Athelstaneford met according to appointment and was constituted, consisting of the Moderator and Mr Walter Gibson, Mr Francis Shirreff and Sir David Kinloch Baronet, Elders. Sir David Kinloch stated that the object of this meeting was to make a brief statement of facts relative to the conduct of Mr Darling, farmer in this parish, when a short statement was laid before the meeting, with being altered and amended is as follows –
Statement
Mr Thomas Darling a farmer in this parish, having been accused of Adultery with Janet Brook, and the Minister having written him a friendly letter, advising him to subject to the Rules of the Church, and get the matter settled, Mr Darling in replay acknowledged his guilt, and proposed to pay a fine for behoof of the poor of this parish; but said he would not appear before the Kirk Session, and if this was indispensable, his case must remain on the same footing in which it stands.
The usual time of dispensing the Lord’s Supper in this parish being at hand, and Mr Darling having acknowledged himself guilty of adultery, the Kirk Session had no idea that he would claim the privilege of Church membership until he was regularly absolved from the scandal under which he lay; but on the Saturday before the Communion, the day on which tokens are given, he demanded a token from the Elders, which they refused, in consequence of which many abusive expressions were uttered against them by him.
His wife having got a token, he took it from her and violently threw it away as far as he could. On the Sabbath morning he behaved to the Elders in a similar manner, and his conduct was so abusive and outrageous as to put one of the Elders into such a state of agitation that it was with difficulty he could perform the duties of his office that day. His conduct at that time was so violent as to be heard within the Church, and disturbed part of the congregation whilst worshipping. Notwithstanding his being refused a token, and being remonstrated with by the Elders, Mr Darling intruded himself to the Lord’s table, and the Kirk Session, in order to prevent a riot and confusion in the Church during the solemnity did not use force to remove him from the table.
The Kirk Session of Athelstaneford can not overlook this outrage and daring violation of the Rules of the Church, and in order to prevent similar outrages being committed in time to come, they will, if advised to do so, apply to his Majesty’s Solicitor General, that this disorderly person be prosecuted in some competent Court, there being much ground to suspect that his conduct on his occasion was intended to throw contempt on our venerable Church and on her office bearers.
In the meantime the Kirk Session resolve to lay the above statement of facts before the learned Procurator for the Church of Scotland, and they respectfully crave his advice in this case.
The Kirk Session feel it their duty to lay a similar statement of this case before the Presbytery of Haddington, to whom they look up with great respect, for advice and direction in this and in other difficult cases.

CH2/18/1 p. 186
Athelstaneford 22nd August 1834
The Kirk Session of Athelstaneford being met and constituted by prayer, they did and hereby do, agreeably to the advice of the Presbytery of Haddington, issue a summons to Mr Thomas Darling, farmer of West Fortune, to attend a Meeting of the Kirk Session of this Parish, immediately after Sermon on Sabbath first, if convenient for him, or at farthest on Sabbath the 31st current, immediately after Sermon. And the Kirk Session appoint John Paterson, Kirk Officer of this Parish, to leave this summons at the house of Mr Darling before witnesses. This meeting closed with prayer.

Athelstaneford 22nd August 1834
The Kirk Session of this Parish being met and constituted, they reviewed their statement of the 11th of July last relative to Mr Darling. They adhere to that statement and they hereby refer the whole of it, so far as it bears on his conduct, to the consideration of the Presbytery of Haddington.

Athelstaneford 7th Sep 1834
This day the Kirk Session met, and being constituted by prayer, compeared Janet Brook (see minute 27th April 1834). Being suitably rebuked and admonished she was absolved from the scandal of the offence. Sederunt closed with prayer.

Presbytery of Haddington CH2/185/14 p. 128-129
Haddington 2d September 1834
[…]
There was produced and read a Reference from the Kirk Session of Athelstaneford dated 22d August 1834. The Presbytery sustained the Reference, and appointed their officer to summon Mr Thomas Darling farmer at West Fortune to appear before the Presbytery on the 4th day of October next at 12 o’clock noon to answer the Charges of Adultery and profane intrusion on the Ordinance of Our Lord’s Supper. And also to summon the Kirk Session of Athelstaneford to appear before them on the same day.

CH2/185/14 p. 130
Haddington 14th October 1834
[…]
Parties having been called in the case referred to the Presbytery from the Kirk Session of Athelstaneford. Compeared for the Kirk Session the Revd William Ritchie, and Sir David Kinloch, Elder. And Mr Thomas Darling for himself. After mature deliberation the Presbytery agreed to delay giving judgment in this case till next meeting.

CH2/185/14 p 132
Haddington 9th December 1834
[…]
Parties having been called in the case from the Kirk Session of Athelstaneford there appeared the Reverend Mr Ritchie for the Kirk Session, and Mr Darling for himself, with Mr Younger as his Counsel. Parties having been heard, and Mr Darling having been interrogated whether he cordially and unqualifiedly expressed his sorrow and contrition both in the sight of God and of man for the sin of Adultery and profane intrusion on the Lord’s Supper with which he had been charged before the Presbytery, he replied that he did so unqualifiedly. And being also interrogated whether he would willingly submit himself to the authority of the Kirk Session of Athelstaneford according to the rules of the Church, he also replied that he would do so willingly.
After reasoning the Presbytery agreed to remit this most distressing and important case to the Kirk Session of Athelstaneford with instructions to proceed according to the rules of the church; and before they proceed to absolve Mr Darling, to report to the Presbytery, which report shall lie on the table till the next ordinary meeting thereafter.

Thomas Darling is not mentioned again in the Kirk Session minutes for Athelstaneford. He does appear at West Fortune in the 1841 census, a farmer aged 42. Janet Brook is also found living in Athelstaneford village in 1841, with her 7 year old son, David Darling. Although the child is not named in the Athelstaneford Kirk Session or Presbytery of Haddington records, it seems almost certain that David Darling is in fact Thomas Darling's son.

Without the Kirk Session records, it might not otherwise have been possible to identify David's father. These entries also illustrate how individual Kirk Sessions could refer cases to their Presbytery for a ruling. As well as revealing the likely father of David Darling, the entries also reveal something of the character of Thomas Darling. You can see what other records are available for Athelstaneford here.

2 Comments

Forward>>

F is for Fornication, in Fossoway

E is for Education, in Ellon

D is for Dissenters

20 free credits for Scotland's People

Birthdays - but which one?

Adultery in Athelstaneford

Old Scottish

Archives

Categories