History Of The Mackenzies [179]
male line of the Hon. John Mackenzie of Assynt has long been extinct, it will be found in the fact that on the death of Earl Kenneth, known as "the Little Lord," in 1781, the succession to the representation and ancient honours of the family of Kintail and Seaforth, devolved upon the heir male of Colonel Alexander Mackenzie of Assynt, who was the fourth son of Kenneth Mor, third earl, and a younger brother of the Hon. John Mackenzie of Assynt, apart altogether from the conclusive parole evidence given by very old people at the Allangrange Service in 1829.
This effectually disposes of Captain Murdo Mackenzie.
Now as to the more plausible but equally baseless claim of Captain William Mackenzie of Gruinard, and his cousin, the late Major-General Alexander Mackay Mackenzie of the Indian Army. Captain Murdoch Mackenzie's claim having failed, we must go back another step in the chain to pick up the legitimate succession to the honours of Kintail and Seaforth. Here we are met on the way by another claim, put forward by the late Captain William Mackenzie of Gruinard, in the following letter addressed to George F. Mackenzie, then of Allangrange:--
11 Margaret Street, Cavendish Square, London, 24th October 1829.
My Dear Allangrange,--Having observed in the Courier of the 21st inst., at a meeting at Tain, that you were proceeding with the Seaforth Claims, I take the earliest opportunity of communicating to you a circumstance which I am sure my agent, Mr Roy, would have informed you of sooner, did he know that you were proceeding in this affair; and which, I think probable, he has done ere this; but lest it might have escaped his notice, I deem it proper to acquaint you that on Mr Roy having discovered, by authenticated documents, that I was the lineal descendant of George, Earl of Seaforth, he authorised an English counsellor to make application to the Secretary of State to that effect, who made a reference to the Court of Exchequer in Scotland to examine the evidence--Mr Roy having satisfied them with having all which he required to establish my claim. I therefore am inclined to address you in order that you may be saved the trouble and expense attending this affair. Indeed, had I known you were taking any steps in this business, be assured I would have written to you sooner.
I had not the pleasure of communicating with you since your marriage, upon which event I beg leave to congratulate you, and hope I shall soon have the pleasure of learning of your adding a member to the Clan Kenneth. Believe me, my dear Mac, yours most sincerely,
WM. MACKENZIE.
This claim is founded on a Genealogical Tree in possession of the present representatives of the Gruinard family, by which John Mackenzie, their progenitor is incorrectly described as the son of George Mackenzie of Kildun, second son of George, second Earl of Seaforth. It is believed that the descendants of this George, who was the second George designated of Kildun, are long ago extinct; but whether they are or not, it will be conclusively shown, by reference to dates, that John, I. of Gruinard, could not possibly have been a son of his. And to the indisputable evidence of dates may be added the testimony of all the Mackenzie MSS. in existence which make any reference to John of Gruinard. In every instance where his name appears in these he is described as a natural son of George, second Earl of Seaforth.
Before this Earl succeeded he also was known as George Mackenzie of Kildun, hence the error in the Gruinard Genealogical Tree.
The author of the Ancient MS., so often quoted in the course of this work, was a contemporary of John, I. of Gruinard, and he states that Earl George "had also ane naturall son, called John Mackenzy, who married Loggie's daughter." The author of the Ardintoul MS., who was the grandson, as mentioned by himself, of the Rev. Farquhar Macrae, Constable of Ellandonnan Castle in Earl Colin's time, and who died advanced in years as far back as 1704--consequently a contemporary of John of Gruinard--describing
This effectually disposes of Captain Murdo Mackenzie.
Now as to the more plausible but equally baseless claim of Captain William Mackenzie of Gruinard, and his cousin, the late Major-General Alexander Mackay Mackenzie of the Indian Army. Captain Murdoch Mackenzie's claim having failed, we must go back another step in the chain to pick up the legitimate succession to the honours of Kintail and Seaforth. Here we are met on the way by another claim, put forward by the late Captain William Mackenzie of Gruinard, in the following letter addressed to George F. Mackenzie, then of Allangrange:--
11 Margaret Street, Cavendish Square, London, 24th October 1829.
My Dear Allangrange,--Having observed in the Courier of the 21st inst., at a meeting at Tain, that you were proceeding with the Seaforth Claims, I take the earliest opportunity of communicating to you a circumstance which I am sure my agent, Mr Roy, would have informed you of sooner, did he know that you were proceeding in this affair; and which, I think probable, he has done ere this; but lest it might have escaped his notice, I deem it proper to acquaint you that on Mr Roy having discovered, by authenticated documents, that I was the lineal descendant of George, Earl of Seaforth, he authorised an English counsellor to make application to the Secretary of State to that effect, who made a reference to the Court of Exchequer in Scotland to examine the evidence--Mr Roy having satisfied them with having all which he required to establish my claim. I therefore am inclined to address you in order that you may be saved the trouble and expense attending this affair. Indeed, had I known you were taking any steps in this business, be assured I would have written to you sooner.
I had not the pleasure of communicating with you since your marriage, upon which event I beg leave to congratulate you, and hope I shall soon have the pleasure of learning of your adding a member to the Clan Kenneth. Believe me, my dear Mac, yours most sincerely,
WM. MACKENZIE.
This claim is founded on a Genealogical Tree in possession of the present representatives of the Gruinard family, by which John Mackenzie, their progenitor is incorrectly described as the son of George Mackenzie of Kildun, second son of George, second Earl of Seaforth. It is believed that the descendants of this George, who was the second George designated of Kildun, are long ago extinct; but whether they are or not, it will be conclusively shown, by reference to dates, that John, I. of Gruinard, could not possibly have been a son of his. And to the indisputable evidence of dates may be added the testimony of all the Mackenzie MSS. in existence which make any reference to John of Gruinard. In every instance where his name appears in these he is described as a natural son of George, second Earl of Seaforth.
Before this Earl succeeded he also was known as George Mackenzie of Kildun, hence the error in the Gruinard Genealogical Tree.
The author of the Ancient MS., so often quoted in the course of this work, was a contemporary of John, I. of Gruinard, and he states that Earl George "had also ane naturall son, called John Mackenzy, who married Loggie's daughter." The author of the Ardintoul MS., who was the grandson, as mentioned by himself, of the Rev. Farquhar Macrae, Constable of Ellandonnan Castle in Earl Colin's time, and who died advanced in years as far back as 1704--consequently a contemporary of John of Gruinard--describing