NOW TO WORK BACKWARDS
FROM THE TWENTIETH CENTURY.
In an endeavour to combine the
family name of the 20th century A.D. with that name of previous
historical connection I approached the problem from two directions;
FIRSTLY
coming forward from the time of
DONALD, the second
Lord of the Isles and
SECONDLY going
backwards in an endeavour to find a
common meeting point.
SCOTLAND
THE
CON – CONN OF AUCHRY
1450 AD -
- 1690 AD
The
Cons or Conns of Auchry in Scotland
is the starting point to travel forward from DONALD, second Lord of
the Isles and Kintyre, had an association with Margaret Leslie, one of the
daughters of the Baron of Straloch. I have not been able to
discover whether or not they had actually married but after the birth of
WILLIAM, she, some time later left him with the Donalds, and returned
to her kinsfolk in the Aberdeenshire area.
Now this, WILLIAM, a Donald, a
son of Donald, the second Lord of the Isles and grandson of John,
the first Lord of the Isles, became involved in a family dispute and
had to leave, taking with him some of his kinsfolk. He is believed
to have been a monk. There could of course be some truth in this as at
this particular time in history sons of nobility who had no future in the
family i.e. inheriting the title, did take their share of their inheritance,
become part of an order in a monastery and hand their wealth over. They
could of course renege and leave the order. It is probable that William
did not marry until middle age or even later. His mother had originated in
the highlands, Aberdeenshire, and this is where he finally settled on the
land called Auchry, though formerly called Fintry, near Turriff,
which belonged to the hereditary high constable of Scotland. The time in
history would be the late 15th century, and during the
lifetime of William Hay, third Earl of Erroll.
LET US NOW
DIGRESS A LITTLE.
Today, in the twentieth century, for
services rendered, or perhaps part of a perquisite, a customary extra right
or privilege, in later life, a life Peerage may be awarded but a peerage
which carries no Real Estate. In the middle centuries period of Scottish
history the reward was of somewhat different character. In the period now
being referred to, the Anglo-Norman-Scots had rather cornered the
peerages and earldoms but were happy enough in many cases to disgorge
portions of land, river and forest, or maybe heath and moorland only, which
had, at least potential for services rendered. Such gifts were bestowed
mainly within the family or through marriage. This paragraph it is
hoped will go some way to explain the presence of this family of
Con,
in the parish of Monquitter.
After the defeat of John Comyn, third
Earl of Buchan, by Robert the Bruce, at Barra, near Inverurie
in 1307, The Bruce, intent of destroying the power of a rival
claimant to the throne, dispossessed Comyn of all his land in Buchan,
giving the eastern and smaller part to the Hays of Erroll
[Perthshire] in recognition of faithful service; and the western and larger
part [including the future Monquitter] to Sir John Ross, whose
wife was niece of the same Earl of Buchan. As Bruce burned and sacked the
Buchan area immediately after Barra, [an act of barbarism which
Bannockburn can never wholly erase] it may reasonably be supposed
that he was now prepared “to call it a day” in respect of John Comyn, who
now goes out of local history.
Had events taken a different path, it
is unlikely the Cons would have taken up domicile in Monquitter.
UNLIKELY, but not IMPOSSIBLE. And the circumstances could have
been very different.
After the Comyn disaster of
Barra, the feudal system continued, the HAYS doing well, as the
tidying up of real estate brought an increasing number of minor lairds into
the system giving it a broader base. Also with the passing of the years
there were many Comyn descendants, notwithstanding Barra, and a
century later, notwithstanding Harlow, there were many DONALDS. It
seems fairly evident that the very large feudal barons, in a period of acute
political uncertainty, were not unwilling that kinsmen should shoulder some
of the responsibility in keeping the estates secure for something
approaching a quid pro quo [something for
something]. Even kinship was not always
necessary, but political affinity and social background were.
A social fabric had to be defended and who better to help do
so than a family of this social elite and preferably one with a chip on its
shoulder.
With this premise giving the
background, WILLIAM CON, grandson of the Macdonald, Lord of the Isles, loser
of the Harlaw battle, came to Auchry. This preferment coming his way
through the good offices of the then William HAY of Delgaty.
To avoid any confusion, it had
better be stated that the Macdonalds had come from
Ireland some centuries before
William Con
arrived at Auchry and were well established on the western seaboard
and the nearby mainland. Clan Donald, as it became, used various
patronymics [names derived from the name of a father or ancestor] and
the Donald family which settled in the parish which became, in due course,
Monquitter, used the name Con, or maybe
Conn,
derived from famous Irish, and notably Antrim, ancestors. The Cons
were at Auchry for little more than a century. Wedded to the Roman
Catholic faith and it would seem uncompromisingly so, the Cons were
not remembered by the Reformers. But it can be said, that, although the
family was lost to Monquitter there are many thousands bearing the name
throughout the world. [Extracts from The
Cumine Family - The Sale of Auchry Estate from the Banff & Buchan District
Council]
BACK TO MY VERSION OF THE HISTORY
STORY.
Now that he was there he had to have a
family surname to conform with local customs so he took from his ancient
ancestors the unusual surname of CON. This was the name by which he
and his descendants became known and they were a sept of the Clan
MacDonald. [the spelling often varied and included,
Con, Cone,
Conn, Conne, Cuin and even Cann or Quinn].
The hamlet where they first
settled became known as Con in the parish of Auchry in
Monquitter near Turriff. They established themselves there in their
own territory eventually as a family Scottish Clan.
[Not confirmed by the Lord Lyon]
Firstly being tenants of land then owners.
A group of fierce Isles clansmen
they were at times known as “the Children of the Mist”. They were a
Roman Catholic family. No other such name occurred elsewhere
amongst the baronial families of Scotland.
Their family motto was “Constant
and Kynd” an obvious play on the name “Con”. The coat
of arms was a shield with two thin gold bars, one broad gold bar, and
two thin gold bars, all horizontal with one coney at the top and two coneys
at the bottom. At the top of the shield was a falcon. [This
may well have been the ancient Banner of King Conn of Ireland. Gerald Tudor]
This highlander
WILLIAM Con, and
his wife, Jean Cheyn of Straloch, a well established family;
descendants of Norman immigrants to Aberdeenshire, gave birth to a
race who served the Gordons and Hays in their tribal wars for
nearly 200 years.
By the year 1552, the
Cons
were well established in Monquitter and had erected at Auchry
[castle of the kings], and for their own occupation a modest stronghold
named ‘Red Castle’ due to the colour of the stone. It was also
known as Con Castle or Manor House and stood at the top of a
steeply rising spur about a mile west of Cuminestown, (which at that time
did not exist). Auchry farm built in 1767 by Joseph
Cummine of Auchry, stands on this site. Built of red sandstone and
from its size and situation forms a prominent object in the landscape.
There is still, in 1999, a derelict quarry near to the site of
Auchry called ‘Conns Quarry’.
Auchry was part of the barony of
Uddoch. It first appears in the Register of the Great Seal on 15th
August, 1505. At Stirling on this date King James 1V, confirmed pro
bono servitio, to Thomas Copland half the lands of Udoch, Ardin, Auchry
and Balquhindachy, all part of the barony of Udoch. [[Kinedward and the
county of Abirdene; - which are adjudged to belong to the King through the
death of Jon, Earl of Buchan, constable of France, etc., and baron of
Kyneward]. The great barony of Kingeward had passed to the Lords of the
Isles and at length back to the king. The lands had been in the hands of
the king since the non-entry of them by John, Earl of Buchan
(Register of the Great Seal, II,
2869). Thomas Copland
had been one of the tenants there. He was also warden of all the masons in
the north-east, having been appointed by the king
(D. Stevens - Origins of Freemasonry, p.32) The
Cons have been putatively (supposedly) [confirmed in the time of
Alexander Con b.1510] connected with the design and construction of
castles during that century which possibly explains their presence in Auchry
at that time.
The other half of the lands of
Udoch were granted to Robert Gordon of Udoch in July, 1507,
having been alienated by John Forbes of Brux
(Register of the Great Seal, ii,
3111). So, in the first decade of the sixteenth century, the lands
of Udoch were divided into two halves and Thomas Copland and
Robert Gordon were therefore portioners of Udoch (owners of a small
estate). The Cons were not landowners at that time, but were probably
tenants on the lands of Udoch. No-one was “of Auchry” at that time, it
being part of Udoch.
During the decades following their
arrival they acquired lands and estates in Auchry from
Robert Gordon whose heir had not survived, and the wadset of Meikle
of Auchry, after Lord Borthwick to whom it was granted in
1545, fled the country to escape punishment as a heretic.
For the next two to three centuries the
name ‘CON’ played an important role in the highlands and in the
affairs of Scotland. When PATRICK Con married Margaret
Cheyne, the lauchful dochter to Thomas Cheyne of Essilmont , the
Cheynes were manrented to the Earls of Erroll. This
appears to cause a switch in loyalties for the Cons from the Earl
of Huntly to the Earl of Erroll.
In 1560 came the Reformation
in Scotland. Religion started to rear its head towards the end of the
century. Although the reformation had long been on the go in
central Scotland it took about thirty years to have its impact in
the north.
In July, 1592, ”Francis
Hay, Earll of Errole was put in Ward in the castle of Edinburgh for
Papistry” and in February, 1593, the “Earls of Huntley and
Errole denounced rebels and put to the horne for not appearing to
subscribe the Band concerning Religione” The Earls of Huntly,
Erroll and Angus forfeited their titles to the crown.
JAMES V1 was forced to this by the church against his wishes. The
Reformed church was very strong at this time and made its presence
felt. The Protestants were on the ascendant with Catholics
being forced to defend themselves. They were required to give assurances
that they “...shall assist in pursuit of them when required and that the
said principals shall, when charged, appear before the King [James V1] and
council or before the Justice in the tolbooth upon fifteen days
warning”. Principals, sureties and penalties were as follows:-
“Patrick Cheyne of Essilmonth with Patrick Con of Auchry, 5,000 merks”.
In 1594 they were charged to appear
before the King and Council to answer for good rule and loyalty. Patrick
Con of Auchry along with eight others failed to comply and so were denounced
as rebels on 11th July, 1594.
The Earls of Huntly, Erroll and Angus
raised rebellion in their defence which ended in victory at Glenlivet on
3rd October, 1594. The outcome of the battle was greatly affected by
the skilful handling of a disciplined body of between one and two hundred
picked horsemen of Erroll’s. Patrick’s grandson Thomas Chalmers wrote:-
“PATRICK Con .
. .most distinguished for bravery, who by his energy and valour in that
wonderful victory of Glenlivet of three hundred Catholic horsemen
against ten thousand heretic infantry, himself having to change horses twice
in the course of the conflict, added greatly to the immense slaughter of the
enemy”. [Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Scotorum.
Thomas Chalmers
wrote in homage to his mother, Christina of the birth brief, “She
was the daughter of Patrick Con of Auchry, who was captain of Cavalry in the
army of the Earl of Erroll, Lord High Constable of Scotland, at the
Battle of Glenlivet”. [“Alba Amicorum” Ab.
Univ. Studies No. 95] Glenlivet
was the last effort of arms, victorious but vain, to restore
the ancient faith in Scotland.
After the battle things seemed to settle
a little and we find PATRICK Con in transactions.. However, he was
soon in trouble again because of his religion. The Keith’s who
supported the reformed church were given a commission to seek out and
take the prominent Catholics in the north-east. i.e. the Gordons, the
Leslies, the Hays, the Cheynes, the Cons etc.
A resurgence against the reformation had
long been on the go since 1575 and the general assemblies had been
much concerned with means of of its suppression. An extract from “The
booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland” brings the matter direct to
the CON door. In 1596 the Assembly deliberated “. . . in
respect of the report of the brethern of the north, that gentleman
and burgesses are like to leave their houses for fear of the enemies, seeing
their great insolence unrepressed at home, returning to their wives in the
country again, and their provisions in their houses and castles for their
home coming whilk is murmered against in all the country. For remedy it is
craved that the ladies of Huntlie and Arroll presently be brought again and
placed in St. Andrews; my Lord Gordon to be brought to the south and be put
to the schools. Their friends in the south to be wardit; as Cluny Geight.
. . .;[ten are named, mostly Huntly’s people]. . .Towie Barclay, PATRICK
Con.”
The defeat of Glenlivet was left
unrevenged for long but Huntly and Erroll were forced to make their
escape to the continent, and it would appear that Towie Barclay and
PATRICK Con, of Erroll’s following, had likewise fled
the country. In the same year of 1596 he seemingly appeared
with his son at a catholic college in Douai in France since in
Scotland the education of children was charged only to persons professing
the religion “now” established. Taking children abroad to be educated
even under the care of Scottish teachers was against the law. He was
described in the Douai diary of 1596 as Partick Conne “ex
Calviniano factus Catholoicus”. Thereafter a number of
Cons were
educated at Douai between 1596 and 1685 and “made a Catholic from a
Calvinist”.
The Earls of Huntly, Erroll and Angus
had their titles restored to them in 1597 which seemed to lead to a
quiet spell.
By 1597
PATRICK Con
had returned and was again busy at
his duties. He still held office in the courts. He became Commissioner
to the Earl of Errol and later obtained lands in Ayrshire adding
further to the Con’s estates. Life seemed to return to normal.
Soon after the death of
PATRICK Con
in 1642 the Cons were driven into exile and so
disappear from the Scottish scene. About 1690 the Cons finally
disappeared in an important but pathetic letter from Paris and dated the
26 Octobre 1690, from Cone to John Twelfth Earl of Erroll in which an
old poverty stricken PATRICK CON
signing himself Cone places his own and his sons swords at the Earls
disposal; obviously having forgotten that the old order had passed away.
This letter was preserved in the Charter Chest at Slains Castle. It is
re-produced as follows;-
Cone to John Twelfth Earl of
Erroll.
Paris the 16 Octobre 1690.
Richt Honorable
I can not
say, my lord, that anie of my former letters cam saife to your Lordships
hands, since I never had the least return; and tho this be a verie
unseasonable tym writing since the ordenarie commirce dis not goe on as
formerly; yet necessitie oblidges us, in thir hard tyms to find out some by
way, to make our present condition knowne to our friends, as I doe now to
your Lordship with my best respects; begging that your goodness may extend
itself now towards your poore seruents, for that little anuel rent which is
yeasrly due to me upon a part of your Lordships estate; whereof is some
arrieres, besides the yeare current due at this terme of Mertines, which my
cousin the Laird of Balquhyn can make bettir knowne than I, to whom I have
sent a generall discharge and acquittence for allbygones, untill this verie
tearme; which shows the trust and confidence I have in you bothe, as persons
of honor and justice that will doe noe body wrong. The only motive that I
can bring to your Lordship to doe me this favor is the ancient connection of
friendshippe that passed betwixt that honorable and worthy persone of
glorious memory Francis Erle of Arroll, and old Patrick Conne of Auchry, my
grandfather; and ever since we have bene most noble familie; whereof your
lordship is now become the chiefe and head, as the true and lawfull
successor, and I believe we had some particular relation to your famille
besyds, from the house of Eslemont, but this I can not affirm perfitly, it
being so manie years since I came from home. Whosouir I expect your
lordships kindness, and that you will doe me, nor myn, noe wrong. I am now
too old myself to offer my service, but since it has pleased God to give me
three boys, on of them shall be allotted to be alservent to you and your
familie at home; if God send ou more happie and more peaceable tyms, that
honest [men] may liue upon their awne, my thoght is to satle one my children
there, under your lordships favourable protectione. This is my ernest
wishe that all discords may be takne away, and that we may serue God, king,
and countrie with freedome and peace. I can say noe more at present, but
the duty and respects of this poore familie to your lordship, your noble
ladie, and all yours as being
My Lord
Your most humble and most
obedient true seruent
Conne
[The Erroll Papers - Misc. of the
Spalding Club Vol. ii p. 198]
For interest only there was an
Inverness townsman by the name of Cumine who valiantly defended
the Oak Bridge during the burning of Inverness by ALEXANDER, Lord of
the Isles. Strangely when the Cons estate at Auchry was taken from
them it passed into the hands of a family of Cumines. Early in the
nineteenth century the estate was bought from them by a family of Lumsden
So we return to
WILLIAM, a Donald, who is
credited with the founding of this family in the late fifteenth century.
Then we have
ALEXANDER Con
who was born c.1480 and of whom nothing has been found recorded.
At this time the Leslies of
Balquhayne intermarried with the Cheynes of Straloch so in the
early days of the Cons of Auchry an obvious attempt was made to marry
into recognized families in their new habitat and to reinforce their
tentative foothold.
ROBERT Con
died before 1540. Little Auchry had belonged to Robert
Gordon of Udoch’s half of the barony of Udoch and he in turn had granted
it to Robert Con.
So he had been the superior of Robert Con. Little Auchry was
obviously too small a portion of land for Robert Con to style himself “Of
Little Auchry” . Robert Gordon of Udoch had died leaving a minor
heir. He had been a vassal of the Crown and the land had reverted into the
sovereign’s hands because he had left a minor heir. Under these
circumstances the King could gift the ward to a person of his choosing, that
person drawing the income from those lands until such time as the heir
reached his majority.
(R.P.S. ii-2774).
ALEXANDER Con,
the son or brother of Robert Con
was on the 31st August, 1536 the recipient of Royal
letters exempting him from attending “all conventions, inquestis,
schireff-courtis, assemblies, perambulations justice-airis, oistis
and raidis for all the dais of his life” (R.P.S. ii-2164).
He was in December, 1540, given the gift of the ward of the lands
of half the town of Little Auchry by the Crown. The Cons were one step
nearer to becoming small landowners. We now find a clear indication of
lairdship by the mention of ‘Alexander de Auchry. The normal
method of denoting lairdship was to give the name followed by the land held.
In the past farms were multi-tenanted,
not as they are today and so landowners could draw rents from those living
there. Aberdeenshire was part of the governable part of Scotland and
people there had few clan ties. Clans were restricted to the Highlands
and were followers of chieftains there. Landholding in Scotland
was feudal. At the head was the King, the superior or overlord who
granted lands to his vassals, they having to perform some form of feudal
duty, often commuted to a payment in money or kind. Those vassals could, in
turn, grant parts of their lands to their own vassals, so becoming superiors
or overlords themselves. Records of change of ownership of lands held
directly from the Crown are recorded in the register of the Great Seal or
Register of the Privy Seal. However, lands held from a vassal of the king
do not, but can be found in the records of landowners. Not only could
lands be sold, but they could be acquired through marriage, be inherited
from another branch of the family or be acquired through alienation by the
owners. In the past when a landowner needed a large sum of money, he was
forced to borrow and would often pledge his lands as security. This
arrangement was known as a “wadset” a type of mortgage. The wadsetter
would become the virtual owner while the debt remained unpaid. Often, the
debt was never repaid and so the wadsetter became the new owner.
In Scottish records, a landowner
is distinguished by being described as “of” a particular place, while
a tenant or indweller is always recorded as “in” that place.
The two most powerful lords in the
North-East of Scotland were the Earl of Erroll and the Marquis of
Huntly. Following the reformation in 1560 they had continued to
adhere to the Roman Catholic faith and had even plotted for its
restoration. Lesser lairds found it convenient to shelter under the wings
of these lords. During the sixteenth century the Gordons and
Hays were allies but this changed later. The
Cons like many
other families who had remained Roman Catholic sheltered under the wings of
both lords and in 1594, they were all defeated by JAMES V1 who
thereafter arranged for Huntley castle to be destroyed and personally
supervised the blowing up of Slains castle. Thereafter their power
in the North-east was curtailed. However, many of the smaller lairds who
had earlier found shelter with Huntley and Erroll, signed bonds with
James V1 to keep the peace and so did not get involved with the Battle of
Glenlivet in 1594.
In October 1553
ALEXANDER Con now calling himself of
Auchry, was at the Earl of Erroll’s castle at Slains where
he witnessed a contract which involved some underhand dealing by
George, Earl of Erroll who was planning to divorce his wife, Margaret
Robertson, so that he could marry an heiress, Barbara Hay, who
was still a minor She had been held captive at the castle as the
arrangements were made. ALEXANDER Con
was witness to several documents involving the affair. (I of E.C. Erroll Charters - 516;
532; 586).
In March 1553/4 he was at Strathbogie, acting
as a baillie for the Marquis of Huntly’s son. (C.of C.- 611) In April
he and his son
Mr. William Con were granted the lands of Meikle
Auchry as a wadset.
(I of E.C. 536).
After its redemption they were to receive a lease of 5 years. So by
1554 the Cons had acquired Little Auchry (the heir of Robert Gordon
of Udoch had apparently not survived) and Meikle Auchry The
Cons could certainly start calling themselves “of Auchry”.
ALEXANDER Con
was at Slains in October 1557.
In May 1548
ALEXANDER Con
was witness to a charter confirmed by Queen Mary [MARY - QUEEN OF
SCOTS] in Edinburgh.
In March 1558
ALEXANDER Con
was murdered and on the 2nd
November, 1564, John Forbes of Brux and his brothers and several
others were granted a Precept of Remission for his murder.
(R.G.S.- vi-1813).
In 1507 when Robert Gordon had been granted Udoch it was
recorded that he had held it in wadset from Forbes of Brux. The
Forbes family probably resented the fact that Alexander Con had
been given the gift of the ward of Little Auchry and had no doubt
sought revenge). The accused family were Protestant and Con was a
staunch Catholic. The Reformation in Scotland had started so it
could have been some feud to do with religion though it was perhaps a little
early for the Reformation, to have made an impact in the isolated
north-east. Some squabble over land is more likely.
ROBERT Con
who was born sometime about 1540 was a vassal to the
Marquis of Huntly and had the lands of Codrane [Culdrain]
in the barony of Strathbogie. He was killed in battle and
had his lands forfeited to the Crown. (R.P.S.
- vi-1566). The battle was that of
Corrichie, a marshy hollow almost surrounded by the heights of the Hill
of Fare in Banchoory, Ternan parish, on the border of Kincardineshire
and Aberdeen, which took place on the 28th October,
1562. Troops loyal to MARY - QUEEN OF SCOTS won a victory over
the Catholic leader, George Gordon, the Earl of Huntly,
commonly regarded as the greatest magnate in Scotland and nick-named
“cock of the north” - who died after battle of a heart attack. The
Queen’s forces were led by her half-brother, JAMES STEWART
on whom she bestowed the title, Earl of Moray. He was a
Protestant, ambitious to displace the Gordons from their control
of the north-east, and a strong influence on the 19 year old MARY.
The Leslie’s, Hays and Forbes turned traitor to Huntly and it is said
that it was they who killed the Gordons who died that day, not the
forces of Moray.
The Queen granted the deceased
Robert’s lands to Master WILLIAM
Conn.
WILLIAM Con, born
c.1509 or before was the son and apparent heir to
Alexander Con in
Auchry and on the 19th June , 1530, was granted a charter
of the lands of Intown of Logy-auldtoun, 1/3rd of Brukhills, 1/3rd
of the Fauld of Bakyhill and two riggs between Brukhills and Reidhill in the
barony of Aucheterless-Dempster.
(R.G.S.-iii-951; R.P.S. - ii-659) He and his
father were living on the lands of Auchry, more likely as tenants than just
indwellers.
In June, 1541 King JAMES V granted to
WILLIAM Con
the
lands of Rothierbrisbane in the parish of Fyvie, they having been
resigned to the Crown by Robert Stewart of Aithers.(R.G.S.-
iii-2370). By this time he would be in his late
30’s or 40’s and his father Alexander in his 60’s. On the 22nd
June, 1563, he fell heir to the lands of Codrane. In April,
1564 he was attacked by the Gordon’s of Gight, a notorious
family, James Cheyne and eighteen others and by April, 1567,
he was suffering from “the gravell and uthiris seiknes within his
body” and was exempted from attending public meetings of all kinds.
(R.P.S.- vi-3404). This was ratified by the
Queen on 7th April, 1567, by letter to him. He died soon
afterwards. His wife Barbara Leslie, daughter of Leslie of
Balquhain, appears to have killed herself in May of that year and
in that year the Crown gifted her goods which it had confiscated (escheat)
to John, Bishop of Ross recording that this was “through the
slaughter of Barbara committed by herself”.
(RPS - vi-3646). He in turn gave it to the keeping of
William Leslie of Balquhain.
ALEXANDER Con
also had a daughter, JONET
Con, who married Robert Crichton
of Condiland.
Another son of ALEXANDER
was THOMAS,
recorded as his second son, when on a jury in March, 1556. In
October, 1559 he was in court contesting the right to Balmelie with
Andrew Craig and was again on a jury in July, 1574. (R.S.C.Ab.-vol.i pp.124; 142;
145 and 211).
The ‘Con of Auchry’ reputed
to be a master mason [Jervise, “Epitaphs &
Inscriptions”, 1, 177]
and builder of the “Catholic Castles” of Gight, Delgaty, Craig and
Towie Barclay [possibly also Lesmoir and Auchry] as well as Errol
Lodging in Turriff, must have been a son or nephew of the
ALEXANDER Con
b. 1510. [Stuart
Mitchell - 1998]. No christian name is recorded.
When
WILLIAM Con had died, his heir,
PATRICK Con,
was a minor, and the gift of the ward was given to William Leslie of
Balquhain. It recorded that WILLIAM died in November 1567 and had never
taken official possession of the lands of Auchry. (R.P.S.- vi-46).
He was to hold the lands until the heir,
PATRICK Con, came of age. In January
,1573/4 he had done so and was served heir to his grandfather,
Alexander Con of Auchry
and to his father, William Con,
in half the lands of Hairmoss which had been in non-entry
for 6 years and 2 months. PATRICK
must therefore have been born c.1552.
(R.S.C. Ab. - i-p.193).
In October, 1574,
THOMAS Con in
Auchry, the uncle of PATRICK Con,
brought an action of spuilzie (stealing moveable goods) against
John Leslie of Balquhain and James Leslie, burgess in Aberdeen,
involving alleged spuilzie committed by William Leslie of
Balquhain during the time he had the gift of the ward. (R.S.C.Ab. -i-p.213).
PATRICK Con,
son and heir of Mr. WILLIAM Con
inherited his father’s and grandfather’s lands in January 1573/4.
He married Margaret Cheyne, second youngest daughter of Thomas Cheyne
and Elizabeth Gordon. She was one of thirteen children. Her father had
died when she was very young and not long after his own father, Patrick
Cheyne of Essilmount had died.
(E.C.T.Ed.C.C.-18 July 1565 and 17 July 1565 respectively).
Patrick Cons grandmother was Elizabeth Gordon, her
father was James Gordon, Laird of Haddo. PATRICK and
Margaret had six children. The lands he had inherited were half of
Little Auchry and half of Hairmoss. The lands were part of the barony of
Udoch, the other part belonging to the Coplands of Udoch. Close by
were the Craigs of Craigfintray, the Mowats of Balquholly and
the Hays of Delgatie (relatives of the Earl of Erroll and a more
substantial family)
The Cons history during the first
half of the seventeenth century cannot be viewed in isolation. What
happened to them was closely bound up with who their neighbours were. They
were all fairly small landowners and so were hungry for land and as a result
clashes and feuds abounded.
As all these families lived fairly close
to each other, disputes arose over ownership of parts of lands and their
boundaries. The Mowats of Balquholly, for example, had had a quarrel with
the Craigs of Cragfintry over a piece of land called Balmelie, each claiming
ownership. The Mowats had stolen cattle belonging to the tenants of the
Craigs. At a later stage, a relative of the notorious Gordons of Gight had
attempted to extend the boundaries of Balmelie by building a fold dyke on
Mowat land. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, Magnus Mowat of
Balquholly had been oppressed by Patrick Copland of Udoch and his brother,
Alexander, a freebooter. They had trampled down corn, attacked tenants and
had even occupied the Mowat castle on their lands in Caithness, taking away
its contents and also stock on the home farm.
Patrick Copland died in 1606, but
his son, Alexander Copland, continued to oppress the Mowats. He invited
the assistance of PATRICK Con
of Auchry and his son, also Patrick,
John Gordon of Ardlogie (one of the seven lawless sons of Gordon of Gight)
and several others. In July, 1607, they and retainers, rode
to Glenhill moss on Balqholly land (Mowarts) where tenants were cutting
peats. They carried away large numbers and cast the rest back into the
peat pits. Then Copland and John Gordon, egged on by PATRICK Con and his son
Patrick,
laid siege to Balquholly castle and waited for Magnus Mowart to come
out. Fortunately for him he stayed inside. (R.P.S. (RPC) addenda 419). It
appears here that John Gordoun of Ardlogie was a notorious troublemaker.
“They went about the country as Champions of Rome, but their real
object was plunder”. It is doubtful whether the Cons were out with
the Gight “boyis” on a regular basis. This was basically a family feud
between the Copelands and Gordouns and Magnus Mowat in which the Cons taking
the side of the catholics got embroiled. [The
House of Gordon].
The aggression however, was not
one sided. In July, 1607,
PATRICK Con and
the widow of Patrick Copland complained to the Privy Council that
Magnus Mowat had a grudge against them and intended molesting them over
their possession of Balquhandachie.
(R.P.C.-537/2; 540).
In August 1607, Mowart was
ordered by the Lords to find caution or 2,000 merks not to harm
PATRICK Con and
Elizabeth Auchinleck (Copland) .
(R.P.C. - vii-685). The
following year Magnus petitioned to have the amount reduced to 1,000 merks,
he being “ane mean gentilman”. (R.P.C. -
viii-42). Thereafter no further clashes occurred
between them..
However, in 1612,
PATRICK Con had
to face invasion by Arthur, Lord Forbes, who had gone to Teuchar,
part of Little Auchry, where he had pulled up “cornis sawine thairupoun
by the ruitis”, trampling the corn down by riding through it and
“wirring a certaine number of his scheip with his doggis”. (R.P.C.-ix-402)
Not only was money scarce at the
beginning of the seventeenth century but the country had suffered a
series of poor harvests as the sixteenth century drew to a close. The
annual income of landowners was derived from rents paid by tenants and so
many of them found themselves in dire financial straits as a result of these
setbacks. PATRICK Con
was no exception. In August, 1601 he had been forced to borrow 700
merks from James Pantoun and his wife, tenants in Meikle Auchry,
granting them the shadow half eight oxingates of Little Auchry in
wadset. (Aberdeen
Sasines (RS4) - RS4/1
f.190). He redeemed the lands in May 1604.
(RS4/3 f.206),
indicating that his affairs had improved. They certainly had for in
1603 he acquired the wadset of the eight oxingate lands of Meikle Auchry
known as Potdrum, part of the barony of Craigfintry from Thomas Urquart
of Craigfintray, tutor of Cromarty. (RS/3 ffs.
117; 119). These he held until 1609 when
they were redeemed by Thomas Urquart for 2,000 merks. However, in 1604,
having redeemed the lands from Pantoun, he needed money again and so
borrowed 2,050 merks from Archibald Ramsay, granting him wadset of
the sunny half lands of Little Auchry and Teuchar,
which he redeemed in June, 1605. (RS/3 f.
288; RS/4 ffs. 1312; 433).
In May, 1607, John
Forbes of Brux and his wife, sold him the shadow half lands of
Udoch-Brux. (RS4/6 f.44; RMS) when he lent money to his neighbour,
Alexander Hay of Delgaty, in return receiving the wadset of the lands of
Meikle Atrichie in the parish of Logie Buchan.
(RS5/1 f.81).
The Cons appear to have
decided to quit Auchry and move to Meikle Atrochie. for in
December, 1617, Patrick and his eldest son sold Little Auchry to
Alexander Hay of Delgaty (RS5/1 f.77),
and in 1618, they acquired the
Copland land of Balquhandachie and in 1620 sold it too to
Alexander Hay. (RS5/1 f.333; RS5/2 f.500).
Thereafter, the CONS
became known as “of Meikle Atrochie” although they also appear as
“of Auchry” perhaps because they were still feudal superiors of those
lands.
PATRICK Con
was sheriff depute of Aberdeen for a time. (RS.C.Ab.-
ii-99). He was also servitor to the Earl of
Erroll, acting for him in many transactions.
(RS Records). In 1616 he was appointed by
the Privy Council among others to apprehend and try thieves in the vicinity
of Slains. (R.P.C.-x-674).
He is assumed to have died in the latter part of the 1620’s as he
ceases to occur in records after 1627.
PATRICK Con
and Margaret Cheyne
his wife have marked their time on earth by a stone, carrying the initials
of the pair - P.C. and M.C. and displaying a coat or arms [see
photographs] which unfortunately was never registered at the Court of
Lyon. The stone can be seen built into the west gable of the farmhouse
called “The Castle of Auchry” near Turriff. A description in
heraldic terms, minus the supporters, is given by Jervise
[Epitaphs and Inscriptions 1875]
Details now of the manner of
Patrick’s land dealings which complicated affairs for his grandson
Patrick
In July. 1672, Dr David Hay, owner of
Delgaty, who also described himself as heritable proprietor of Artrochie
instituted an action in the Court of Session in Edinburgh against various
people connected in some with the Cons. Among those listed was
Patrick Con
(described as now of Artrochie). The resulting action threw up a
complicated and at times confusing set of events which had followed the
acquisition by Patrick Con
of the lands of Artrochie. While the sasines indicate that
Patrick Con
had acquired Artrochie through his loan to Hay of Delgaty, the action in
1672 explained that what had happened was that Auchry had been excambed
for Artrochie, in other words, a straight exchange had taken place,
although it was argued that the lands of Auchry were more valuable than
Artrochie. Then in 1642, Patrick Con
calling himself by then of Artochie, had died leaving no issue. His
nephew, William Con,
son of Alexander Con
of Woodend, brother of Patrick,
became his heir. Once heir,
William Con, finding himself in need
of money, had used the lands of Artrochie as security for a loan. He had
alienated them to Captain William Neilson , a soldier of fortune, who
had in turn alienated them to John Alexander, an advocate in Aberdeen and
George Buchan of Savoch. However, the lands were already burdened with a
debt which his uncle, Patrick Con, had incurred. He had borrowed œ1,000
Scots, from Thomas Menzies of Balgreen and so Thomas Menzies had a prior
claim to the estate, should he wish to reclaim the debt. However, in 1643,
he had sold his claim to Dr. Did Hay, the institutor of the action in
1672. The object of the action was to prove the prior claim and so have
all other claims declared null and void by the court. This was the outcome
of the case. What also emerged in the case was that
Patrick Con had a sister,
Helen Con,
who had married George Wood in Woodend, part of the Mowart estate of
Balquholly which had been alienated to
Alexander Con,
William Con’s father and grandfather of Patrick (CS22/38 - Acts and
Decreets of the Court of Session 20 July, 1672 - Decreet - Hay v Jamesone
and others).This court case put a seal on the Cons ownership of Artrochie.
Because of debt they were no longer landowners and so no longer appear in
property records. Patrick Con cited in the case as heir to
William Con
of Artrochie was not present, being described as “without the realm”. He
was almost certainly on the continent and probably in France where so many
of his family had been training as priests or attending Jesuits colleges.
Details of PATRICK’S FAMILY
(1).
PATRICK Con, the
younger, of Auchry. Born in 1581 he was the first Con to
enter Douai in France in 1596. He was supposedly a Calvinist when
he joined the College and came away a catholic. He returned from France to
join the service of his father and the Earl of Erroll as is noted by a
mention on 18th August, 1597. On 26th May, 1607 he
accompanied his father in his official duties and acted as a witness to
transactions in Aberdeen. Around 1609 he started acting
independently of his father. In 1617 he is mentioned as having a
wife, Helen Kinnaird, but they appear to have had no issue. She is
recorded as his widow in 1642. In early 1620 he went to
France with the Earl of Erroll’s son and the brother of the Earl
of Kinghorn. On returning in March, 1620 he was apprehended
at the port of Leith near Edinburgh. His chest was opened by the
baillie and it was found to contain “sundrie popish treatise and works”
as well as letters to various noblemen and others. This was
reported to the Privy Council and he duly appeared before them but his case
was dismissed. (R.p.c.- xii - 226n; 240; 241n)
This seemed odd but they wanted the Earl as well.
Later that same month, on 28th March,
1620, at Holyroodhouse, a charge is made to the Earls of Erroll to
appear and answer, the one for sending his son, and the other for sending
his brother to France in the company of
PATRICK Con,
a known Papist; with charge also for the appearance of the said
Patrick Con.
“Forsomekle as. . . .in the company with
Patrick Con,
younger, of [Auchrie] who is a person known to be Papist. . . .and against
the acts of His Majesty’s Council and . . . kirk, that noblemen or
gentleman’s sons should be sent out of the country under the charge of such
persons as are of a known sound and unsuspect religion. . . charging the
said twa Erles and the said Patrick to appear personally before the said
Lords under pain of rebellion”. It would seem that the charge against the
Earl and Patrick came after his return, apprehension and release at Leith.
PATRICK CON
and his wife were ordered to leave the
country by the lst June.
Patrick complained to the
Privy Council that this did not give him time to dispose of his estate nor
to settle his affairs and so the Lords extended the time to October, 1631.
(R.P.C. -
iii-515). In October the time was extended to
January, 1632. (R.P.C.-iv-372).
He and his wife duly left but in June 1632, Patrick had returned carrying
with him a letter by Charles lst dated 28th
October, 1631, in which allowed him to remain
for a year. (R.P.C.- 525-6). As he and his wife
had no heir the lands passed to another branch of the family, his brother
ALEXANDER.
A letter from the King, Charles 1 . . .
.given at our court at Whitehall this 28 of October 1631 to the privy
council is as follows:- “We are informed by Patrick Con that he having in
obedience to our laws and late orders of our council retired himself and his
family furth of the country, was notwithstanding by the Presbytery of
Aberdeen excommunicated after his departure and by consequence thereof those
to whom he entrusted his estate have hitherto and may still [though
unjustly] detain it from him, except that we out of our princely
commiseration dispense with the rigour of the law and grant him our licence
to abide and follow his business within the country for one whole year. We
therefore consider that the petitioner being from the cradle bred in poperie
and having yielded humble and timely obedience to our laws and government,
ought not in equity or reason to incur the punishments that are due to
disobedients only. . . provided that he shall not give scandal or just
offence to the Church or Government”. On 22nd November 1631 Patrick and his
family were given licence to return from exile and remain in Scotland for
one year.
Five years later
PATRICK Con is still in
Artrochie, whether after a second spell in exile is not clear. He died
before November, 1642, when his wife Helen Kinnaird was
described as “widow of
Patrick Con” when she complained
against WILLIAM Con
of Artroch and others for assault on servants while engaged in harvesting.
It seems that WILLIAM
tried to apportion Helen’s land against her will. “It was
ordained that William Con
be warded in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh until they release him and he pay”.
WILLIAM
was Helen’s nephew. Nothing much is known
about Helen Kinnaird apart from her name and relation to Patrick.
She appeared only a few times in records. In 1622 she was given as
spouse of PATRICK Con
of Mekill Artroquie. The surname originated in Perthshire and even today
is still uncommon in Aberdeenshire.
[2].
ALEXANDER
Con,
in Woodend, who married Margaret Kennedy, daughter of the
deceased John Kennedy of Kermucks and Isobel or Elizabeth Cheyne
(Margaret Cheyne was Isobel Cheyne’s niece). John Kennedy of Kermucks died
in 1591 and his widow, Isobel Cheyne re-married to Magnus Mowat
of Balquholly, neighbour of the Cons. They had two sons:-
Alexander Con
died as a fairly young man and his widow re-married to Mr. Robert Mercer,
minister of Ellon (Fasti vol ).
[i]
WILLIAM described as a “pupil son”
in 1609 (a pupil being under 14) (RS4/8
f.17). who became the heir to the Con lands. In
1624 he is “son of Alexander con in Wodend” and next he is “son of
Alexander Con in
Wodend, curators of . . .”. This implies that his father Alexander had
died and that he was still under twenty-one years of age. [Sasines]
In 1642 William [Con of Artroch] assaulted the harvesters at Mains
of Artrochie and was ordained to be warded in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh.
The action was brought by Helen Kinnaird, widow of
Patrick Con [2nd]. It would seem that William
did not get on too well with Patrick [1st], his uncle and Helen, his cousin
by marriage. 1655 is the last mention of
William Con in
Sasines.
[ii] JAMES who married Helen
Kinnaird who was a niece of the Helen Kinnaird who had married
Patrick Con.
JAMES Con
had three children:-
(i)
ALEXANDER
b. 1621, who was ordained in 1640 and died in 1663.
(Records of the
Scots Colleges)
(ii)
PATRICK was born in 1615
and spent his first seventeen years in Aberdeenshire and then entered
Douai in France in 1632. From Douai he returned to Scotland due to
ill-health He is next heard of in 1642 at the Scots College in Rome
leaving there in 1644 to live a full life in France, Italy and Spain
with Agnes Robertson his wife and family.
The Blairs Papers provides a short
history; “Patrick Con,
nephew to George Con,
and son of Patrick Con
of Auchry, Aberdeenshire. A distinguished layman who did a great deal to
help the Scottish Secular clergy. He held some post in the household of
Cardinal Barberini and at the Restoration acquired influence at the English
Court. His letters for the period 1660-70 are extremely outspoken
and illuminating for the history of that period”.
He had a son
George. This family were living in Paris
in the 1670’s when Patrick went to the rescue of James
Mowat, a merchant in Paris and Roman Catholic like himself. James
Mowat had fallen on hard times and
PATRICK Con continued to aid him and his
family as they descended into destitution. He did so partly because he had
“the honour of being somwhyt related” to James Mowat
(CS181/10/3 -
Miscellaneous records of the Court of Session).
James Mowat’s sister had married a Robertson. In 1680
PATRICK
appointed another frequent visitor to Paris,
James St. Clair of Roslin as his factor to deal with any business he had in
Scotland (RD4/296/67 - 15 Mar 1681 - made in Paris in 1680). In 1688
he was visiting London when he lent Kenneth, Earl of Seaforth
14,000 merks Scots
(RD2/73/490 - 21 Jul 1691). In 1692
anxious to get his money back he appointed Mr. James Leslie, advocate in
Edinburgh as his factor. The arrangement was signed in
Paris (RD22/74/477 - 9 Feb 1692).
PATRICK Con
[Conne]
now at eighty three and the last laird had chosen to lead his
life outwith his homeland though much of it was spent aiding other
refugees. Spain, France or Italy could unearth much of the family
fortunes after this period though the direct line in Scotland seems to end
here.
PATRICK Con
was dead by May 1700 and
his son, GEORGE born in 1672 and who attended the Scots
College at Douai from 1685 to 1688, was his heir to the Earl
of Seaforth’s Bond. In May 1700 he wisely disposed of that Bond to
Charles Davidson Esq., the arrangement being made in Flanders.
GEORGE Con
had been born in Paris, educated at Douai and lived all his life in
France. He would, therefore, have been very much a native. Roman
Catholic by religious persuasion and French speaking as would any and
sisters he might have.
(iii)
WILLIAM who married Jean
Sandilands. She was b. 1636 and d. 5/8/1687. He is
reputed to have been her second husband. There is a record of an
inscription on a gravestone in St. Nicholas Churchyard in Aberdeen
of a John Moir, first of Stoneywood who died on 15 Nov. 1674.
His widow was this Jean Sandilands.
ALEXANDER
left as his heir his eldest son,
WILLIAM Con. who in 1635
received sasine of Woodend. (RS5/9 f. 332). In September, 1655,
he became heir to the lands of Atrochie, the sasine recording that PATRICK Con
elder had been his “grandsir” and PATRICK Con
younger, his uncle.
(RS5/18-f.87).
(3)
GEORGE Con,
scholar and Roman Catholic priest . He was born in 1604 or [1598],
and entered Doulai college at the age of fifteen and left at seventeen on
account of his health, which being at the best very tender, became more so
under the strict discipline observed in the college. His education was
completed at the Scots College in Paris and then at the National College of
Rome and then on to the University of Bologna. He then became tutor to the
sons of the Duke of Mirandola until 1623, when he left their service
to further his own career and was attached for a brief period to the
household of Cardinal Monalto who unfortunately died six months later
leaving George a handsome legacy. He must have made a good impression
after such a short period with him. He then became secretary to Cardinal
Barberini, nephew of Pope Urban V111, accompanying him on his missions as
Papal Nuncio to France and Spain, clearly being groomed for the diplomatic
service of the Vatican; domestic prelate to Urban V111: Canon of St.
Lorenzo in Damaso in Rome, and enriched with other benefices; he brought
with him to England in 1636 a record of scholar and historian. His
first work was a life of Mary Stuart published in 1624. His tour of
duty as Papal Envoy to the court of Charles 1 lasted till 1639
and he was conspicuously successful at Court but his health failed him and
he died on the 10th January 1640, whilst on his
way to Rome, having been designated Cardinal. He was buried in the church
of St. Lorenso, in Damaso, Rome
(S.
Tocher The Book of Buchan).
His tomb is surmounted by a bust of George Conaeus and his coat of arms.
A portrait of him hung in Gordon Castle but is now misplaced after
the castle was sold relatively recently. He had accumulated a great
fortune which he left entirely to the Barberini family except part of his
library which he bequeathed to the Scots College.
[Album Amicorum, Aberdeen University Studies, No. 95], [Archaeologia Scotica,
Vol. iv. p.376, W.C. Trevelyan], [Dictionary of National Biography Vol. xii.
p.20]
[4) JONET
Con,
who married William Gordon at the milne of Udoch. In
1602, they obtained the wadset of part of the Balquholly lands,
redeemed by Magnus Mowat in 1607.
(R.S.C.Ab.- ii-99).
In November, 1607, they were granted the wadset of half of
Balquhindachie and Ardin. (RS4/6. f.244)
(5)
CHRISTIAN or CHRISTIANE
Con who married Gilbert Chalmer of
Cults the son of Alexander Chalmer and Jean Lumsden. (Aberdeen sasines index).
(6)
HELEN Con
who had married George Wood in
Woodend.
(7)
JAMES Con,
servitor to the Earl of Erroll.
(Register of the Privy Council vii-661).
In 1622 he was a tenant of
Knockiemilne on an Erroll estate west of Turriff.
In 1625 he appears on a list of Roman Catholic priests and adherents
drawn up at the beginning of the reign of Charles 1 and appears as “James
Con of Knokkemill
a railer and convoyer ordinarlie of Priestis”. He was following the
family faith. Excommunicated as a papist in 1627-8. (R.P.C.-2nd ser. ii 478;
502; 508).
On 2nd December, 1628, CHARLES 1
sent a “Charge to the Marquis of Huntly and Lord
Lovat, Sheriff-Principal of Elgin and Forres, to apprehend certain
persons . . .James Con
in Knockiemylne is named. Huntly and Lovat are given authority. . .”to
pass, search, seek, take and apprehend”. . . .the persons named and to
commit them to ward and detain them. . . .”aye and while they may be
conveniently exhibited before his
Majesty’s Council to undergo their deserved trial and punishment”. So
James Con was under threat of losing land and goods. In December,
1630, JAMES Con
was included in a list of Aberdeenshire men for . . .”returning to their
houses”. . . against direct orders to the contrary and required them to be
entered into ward. he was ordered to be warded in Blackness castle.
(R.P.C.
- iv-599). In
September 1640 he was harboured by Captain Alexander Copland in
Aberchirder. (P.B.Str- (Spalding Cub) p.25)
In 1643 he is caught up with :-
“Upone Setterday 11 November,
James Con
in
Knokkiemill was brocht in to Abirdene by the schirref of Banf, callit the
laird of Birkenbog. He had bein takin and wardit in the tolbuith of Banf
nyne weeks abefoir for his religioun onlie, being ane excommunicat papist,
and that day was convyit in to Abirdine, quhair he wes wairdit in the
tolbuith and deliverit to Mr. Williame Davidison, schirref deput He
remanit thair whill the 17 of November, and then wes transportit be the
schirref deput to the schirref of the Mernis, and so furth from schire to
schire, whill he was brocht to Edimnbrughe, quhair he were receavit and
wairdit”. [Spaldings
Troubles in Scotland 1630 -45].
At Edinburgh on 2nd January, l644
he is released from prison on the assurance that he will depart the
country”. . . .under pain of one thousand pounds and till the occasion of a
ship be offered for his transport . . “and promised not to return”. . .under
pain of death”. In January, 1644, he was sent abroad.
(S.S. - Justiciary Cases - 1624-1650).
He may have been the JAMES Con,
excommunicate papist recorded in August 1652 as keeping company with
Lord Oliphant (who had property in the parish of Rothiemay in Banffshire).
Lord Oliphant was reported as having a leaning towards popery
(P.B.Str.-p.223).
James Con seemingly went to Paris where he met with
Father Gilbert Blakhal who wrote “. . .James
Conne at Knokiemilne being banished out of
Scotland for the Cathilick religion, did come to paris, and there he did
tell me that.
That same year [1644] a letter
from his nephew De Chalmer, son of Christine
Chalmer nee Con.
It was dated July 8th 1644 in Paris and was sent from De Chambers to
Lothian [Marquess of Lothian. Asking him to. . .”. .move the Privy Council to
recall his old uncle, James Conne,
who having been banished his native country for no other crime but his
religion and was cast away upon the sands of St. Vallery in Picardy and so
made shipwreck of all he had. . .who never having had his health since being
in France should justly be pitied, which moved me to beg at your Lordships
hands that he might be suffered to return to his native country when I shall
give sufficient caution he shall give no scandal much less do anything that
will prejudice the public weal of that kingdom, so that I make bold being
moved with compassion to supplicate your lordship in all humility that you
would be pleased out of your wonted generosity to take this poor old man in
your noble protection and being an instrument to move the right honourable
Lords of his Majesty’s Council for to recall him he may be suffered to end
his days [which can not be long] in his native country”.
[Inventory of Documents,
State papers and Letters belonging to the Marquess of
Lothian; Register House, Edinburgh].
In April of 1650 he is seen back in
the north-east. The plea presumably having
worked but is again accused of poperie along with the Laird
of Delgaty and his daughters Sopia and Anne Hays.
[Presbytery of Aberdeen [Synod]. Extreme Crimes].
In 1652 Lord Oliphant is acknowledged
to “frequent the companie of one
JAMES Con,
an excommunicate papist”.
He crops up again in 1660 as being a noted catholic
but then is heard no more. For someone who pleaded ill-health in 1644 he
certainly seemed to recover his vitality and used his time as a noted
‘resistance worked’. [The Innes Review Vol. viii
No. ii 1957]
Many of the family of Con
had been training as priests or attending Jesuits
colleges in France. In particular that of Douai record quite a few Cons.
There was Patrick Con
from Scotland in 1596; Patrick
Con from Turriff aged 17
in 1632; Alexander Con
from Turriff aged 15 in 1636, the son of
James Con and Helen
Kinnaird; Patrick Con in 1675, and
George Con aged
13 in 1685, the son of Patrick Con
and Agnes Robertson. There were also a number recorded at
Rome - Francis Con
from Aberdeenshire in 1614;
George Con in 1619;
Patrick Con in
1644; another Patrick Con
in 1675 and John Con
from France in 1698
(S.Coll- New Spalding Club).
It has already been seen that the Cons stayed faithful to the
Roman Catholic faith and several of them became Roman Catholic
Priests. It is quite possible that
PATRICK Con heir of
WILLIAM Con could
have become a priest. In 1670 for example on 18th
August, a complaint was made by the King’s advocate against the fact
that Jesuits coming into Scotland to preach and convert people were on the
increase. He cited Francis Irvine, brother of Alexander Irvine of
Drum, an Aberdeenshire landowner who had corresponded with Jesuits, seminary
priests and papists. Mass had been heard in his mother’s house in Aberdeen
and in the house and lodgings of Sir Gilbert Menzies of Pitfoddels.
Francis Irvine had received and entertained at least six priests,
one of them was Father Con,
a Jesuit and trafficking priest, who went under the alias of Mr.
Sinclair.(R.P.C.-3rd
series, iii, p.210)
While the Cons sold their
lands of Auchry there were still several Cons living in the
area after that. One such was
WILLIAM
Con,
servitor to Isobel Cheyne, widow of Magnus Mowat of Balquholly.
After her husband’s death, her grand-daughter Elspet Kennedy had kept her
company for four years. Isobel had promised to pay her, but her
circumstances had been so reduced by debt on the estate that she had been
unable to do so. In 1642, Elspet Kennedy decided to institute an
action against her grandmother in Aberdeen Sheriff Court. Isobel Cheyne
was ordered to attend, but being old and sick sent word to the Sheriff that
she was unable to attend. Undaunted the court decided to go to Balquholly
castle to try her. However, they were met at the gate by Isobel
Cheyne’s redoubtable servant, WILLIAM Con
who barred their entrance. No further action appears to have been taken by
the court. (SC1/7/8
- 15 July 1642).
There is mention of Con in
Ayrshire in the 15th century,
in Edinburgh in 1505 and in Glasgow in 1606.
In Ireland there is a record of a
Hugh Conn of Kilwinniny,
Ayrshire, born 2nd April,
1810, who died on 23rd January, 1839. He is
buried in Movilla graveyard, Newtownards, Co. Down, Northern Ireland. He
had a son Hugh Conn
born 1834-5, died 1836, 16 months old, and buried in the same
graveyard.