Katherine Sutherland Servant to William Campbell Jnr – 1771 Part B
Latheron June Thursday 27th 1771
The session met and constitute when there was given in a flagrant Delation (accusation or charge against someone) of Katherine Suthd Servant to William Campbell lately in Ausdale, that about the latter end of May last, as William was removing from Ausdale for Dunbeath, that the said Katherine Suthd was taken suddenly very ill, that she removed herself to a by-place saying she was in a dangerous way where upon Margt Suthd and Hellen McIntosh asked her what was her case, that she answered something uncommon had come thro her body, like a Caddock and that she would need a doctor and that she had put the matter near a Knocking-stone in an outer house.
Knocking stone. Used for pounding barley and
preparing foods.
Soon after this she retreat to Navidale whence she was brought back to Ausdale again, and her breasts were then inspected by Margt Suthd spouse to John Couper in Ausdale and the foresaid Hellen McIntosh spouse to William Mitchel there and Margt Suthd spouse to John McKean late in Ausdale all women of good Fame who have declared in the presence of the Session now that they found plenty of milk in the said Katherine Suthd breasts and that she owned her pregnancy and abortion ingeniously to them and that William Campbell younger in Ausdale was Father thereto.
The session commended these women for their diligence and inspection and require the said Katherine Suthd to be cited to a Session which shall hold here upon Monday morning.
Unfortunately, the Monday Session was not recorded in the Kirk Session minutes.
William Campbell Younger
1771 Impremis: A list of Income owing to the Session shows:
From William Campbell younger in Ausdale £1…1… [one pound one shilling] Page 285
1771 Of the Above Received Pay as follows: From William Campbell £1...1..
March 1st, 1772 This day Compeared William Campbell in Dunbeath acknowledge his being Father to pregnancy.
Scotlands People: Latheron Kirk Session Minutes (1734-1776) (pages 280, 281, 285, 290)
Pregnant in Fornication
Women were often called before the Kirk Session and delated for being pregnant ‘in fornication’. They usually admitted it, were publicly shamed and stood before the congregation in sackcloth. The father would be named, fined, and would be expected to contribute to the upbringing of the child so it would not be a burden on the parish.
The 1690 Scottish ‘Act Anent Murthering of Children’
The 1690 Scottish ‘Act Anent Murthering of Children’ stipulated that ’ if any woman shall conceal her being with child, during the whole space, and shall not call for and make use of help and assistance in the birth, the child being found dead or amissing, the mother shall be holden and repute the murderer of her own child.’
This 1690 Act in abbreviated form, was read out to the congregation in Scotland regularly.
Thus, in certain circumstances, if a woman had concealed her pregnancy and the birth of an infant that had subsequently died, or had any still birth, miscarriage, or abortion, even if there was no direct evidence, this was open in interpretation as infanticide. While some women were executed for this crime or could face deportation or a prison sentence, it also seems that during the eighteenth century the Scottish courts exercised discretion when sentencing offenders.
Katherine Sutherland’s pregnancy
Katherine had concealed her pregnancy and delivered the ‘matter’ in secret. That was unlawful and would have raised suspicions that she intended to murder her ‘child’. Even after the birth she tried to deny she had been pregnant and claimed that something strange or mysterious had happened to her. She may have been really ignorant about what had happened to her or likely she was very frightened of the consequences and was making excuses. It is unclear if Katherine had a potentially viable infant born dead or a miscarried foetus so premature it was not recognised as an infant. It was referred to as ‘matter’ which she hid and it is unclear that they found the evidence.
That the women had to go to Navidale and bring Katherine back and inspect her breasts suggests that there was no direct evidence of murder. The ‘matter’ seems to have been ‘amissing’. That Katherine’s breasts were full of milk as claimed by the women who inspected her may indicate that her delivery was not so very premature. Or it may have been that she was hiding at Navidale for a few days, giving time for her milk to come in. But at that point in the story Katherine admitted she had been pregnant. The word abortion is also used but I think that could also mean a miscarriage rather than a deliberate termination of a pregnancy.
From Navidale looking north round the coast.
The women who inspected Katherine seemed more intent on reporting her than supporting her. And they got approval from the Session members for their diligence, as did their husbands whose names are recorded. They would all have known Katherine’s circumstances carried widely held social stigma.
Photograph of Mrs McDonald,
a midwife in Invercreran, Argyll, c1866
National Records of Scotland, GD1/1208/1/52
Economically Vulnerable
Katherine was also economically vulnerable as she was in the employment of the man who was the father to her pregnancy. He was moving from Ausdale to Dunbeath and Katherine’s employment was probably in jeopardy. Furthermore, he was a married man who had taken advantage of her. As the previous blog shows, the Campbell family of tacksman William Snr and William Jnr were wealthy and highly regarded in Ausdale at the time. The only thing that can be said in William Jnr’s favour is that he owned responsibility for the pregnancy and paid the fine of one guinea promptly. That he came from a notable family (sometimes there was even another tacksman meeting with the Session elders) and acknowledged his guilt may have saved Katherine from severe punishment and the accusation of murder of her child.
Unfortunately there is no record of what happened next to Katherine.
