Scottish marriage laws allowed that the exchange of mutual consent was sufficient to constitute marriage, with the caveats that there must be no legal impediments, and that proof of consent could be established if required. Thus, a promise of future marriage, and consent to be husband and wife, followed later by ‘carnal intercourse’ was an ‘irregular’ but valid form of marriage.
In 1822, when she was about 25 years old, Hughina Sutherland of Roster had a child to Daniel Grant age 35. No record is given of the child’s name. Daniel Grant appeared before the kirk session on the 4th of February 1822, acknowledged himself to be the father of the child brought forth by Hughina Sutherland, and voluntarily assured the session that it was his intention to marry the woman as soon as possible. But eleven years later Hughina was still waiting for Daniel to make her his wife. Despite his assurances Daniel clearly had no intentions of taking Hughina as his wife and eventually decided to marry the much younger Betty (aka Elizabeth) McKay and requested the Banns for that marriage be declared. Hughina was not happy and protested to the Latheron kirk session.
The Betrothal of Robert
Burns and Highland Mary by James Archer, C 1881
4 March 1833 There after compeared Hughina Sutherland in Roster who had protested against the proclamation of the Banns of Daniel Grant in Roster and Betty McKay in Laide of Roster and being asked as to the grounds on which she objected to said proclamation stated that said Daniel Grant was under the most solemn promises of marriage to her for many years back that she had a child to him eleven years ago and that ever since and also before that time he had not ceased to give her the strongest possible assurances of his determination to make her his wife. That the reason he assigned for not fulfilling these promises long ere this time was that his mother and other friends were averse to it but that as soon as he could be possessed of a little money of his own he was resolved to fulfill his engagements all which professions she relied on until he entered into a contract of marriage with another woman.
That the facts were well known to their respective relations and indeed to the whole neighbourhood and that she was ready to produce the testimony of several witnesses to that effect that she therefore thought his marriage should not be proceded until she had received satisfactory remuneration for the injuries she had sustained by the breach of these promises as well as suitable aliment for the maintenance of his child. She further stated that of many witnesses who might be called she had only brought two to prove what she said believing that it was already in the knowledge of the members of the session, by his own confession that he was under promise of marriage to her at the time her child was born.
Daniel Grant having been present at the time of the above declaration of Hughina Sutherland was asked if he had anything to say in opposition to her statement and he replied that he had not come hither in order to answer any questions but since she was at liberty to prove her aspertions he having been again asked if he denied being under promise of marriage to Hughina Sutherland replied that he declined giving any answer.
The session having taken into consideration the statements of Hughina Sutherland and heard what the witnesses had to say which went substantially to prove what she had advanced and further considered that it is in the recollections of some of the members of the session now present that at the time of Daniel Grant’s appearance before them on the 4th of February 1822 after acknowledging himself to be the father of the child brought forth by Hughina Sutherland at that time he voluntarily assured the session that it was his intention to marry the woman as soon as possible can have no doubt as to his having been under promise of marriage for many years back and consequently disprove in the most unqualified manner of his conduct in breaking through engagements so solemnly and so repeatedly entered in to and thus deeply wounding the feelings and injuring the prospects of a friendless and unprotected woman.
At the same time the session are of the opinion that they are not authorised to stop the proclamation of the Banns in this instance on the grounds alleged but have no doubt that if the whole case is laid before a civil court whose provision it is to investigate such matters ample justice shall be done to the woman both in respect of the breach of promise of marriage and also in regard for the aliment for the child with which the session cannot interfere except by way of recommending to the parties to submit their case to the arbitration of persons mutually chosen which having been proposed to them.
Daniel Grant readily approved thereof and the woman after much hesitation also consented to this arrangement provided she could obtain a suitable person to undertake on her part.
The session therefore authorise the clerk to proceed with the proclamations whether the matter be put to arbitration or not. They feel it their duty however before closing this most painful business in justice to the woman to put upon record their unanimous opinion as to the gross deception practiced upon her for so long a period and the great injury she has in consequence sustained and think it necessary to express to Daniel Grant their highest disaprobation of his conduct and to warn him of the danger of sporting with the feeling and character of a young woman under such peculiar aggravated circumstances.
4 March 1833 Closed with Prayer George Davidson Moderator
Poor Hughina had a hard time. She had waited 11 years in the hope of Daniel fulfilling his promises to her. She also needed his help to support their child. His pathetic excuse was that his mother was averse and he had no money. Hughina was probably better off without that mother-in-law and Daniel died a pauper anyway. But times were hard and being unmarried for life was a struggle. Then when Daniel turned up at the Kirk session he refused to answer the questions put to him. The elders strongly disapproved of him and told him so.
But as the elders were unable to decline the Banns, Daniel Grant married Betty McKay immediately and took her to live in Roster along with his two elderly sisters. By the 1841 census Betty had produced four babies. Daniel was fifty and Betty was twenty-five.
In 1836 Hughina again had a relationship with a man who seemingly had no intention of marrying her. About the end of August 1836 Hughina brought forth a child in fornication. She appeared before the kirk session and gave the name of the father as Hector McKay. She again was spurned in love, as she further stated that Hector McKay had taken off to the ‘South Country’ and she did not know where he was. The Session concluded that until they had an address for Hector they could not procede any further.
Burns and Highland Mary
by Thomas Faed c 1850
Hughina appeared in the 1841 census living in Roster with her brother Donald and her four year old son John McKay. Hughina was a Hemp Spinner. Daniel Grant and his household are just three doors away.
In the 1851 census Hughina was a pauper still living in Roster with her brother Donald Sutherland.
Hughina never married in church
and there is no record of her babies being baptised.
Hughina had a sad end to her life. The death record of her son John in 1855 showed he died of Phthisis - also known as Tuberculosis. He was eighteen years old. We also know from John’s death record that his mother Hughina was already deceased. She must have been aged between 55 and 59 years when she died. The record shows her as Hughina MacKay maiden name Sutherland suggesting that Hector MacKay may have come back and married Hughina – although probably not a ‘regular marriage’ as no records exist of them marrying. Hector MacKay is shown on John’s death record as his father and being an Agricutural labourer. He is also deceased. It seems likely that they all died of Tuberculosis.
Daniel Grant lived to be an old man and died age 83.
Daniel Grant and
Elizabeth McKay in Old Latheron cemetery
Timeline
1787 Daniel Grant born in Eddrachillis Sutherland
1796 Hughina Sutherland born in Roster, Latheron
1814 Betty McKay (aka Elizabeth) born in Sutherland, Farr
1822 Baby born to Hughina Sutherland and Daniel Grant. He promised to marry her.
1833 Hughina challenged Banns of marriage for Daniel Grant and Betty McKay.
1833 Daniel Grant and Betty McKay married on 24.04.1833.
1837 Hughina had a second baby - named John McKay
1841 Census Daniel Grant was shown living in Roster with 2 older sisters, his wife Elizabeth McKay (shown as a female servant) and their four children.
1841 Census Latheron Hughina was living in Roster with her brother Donald and her son John 4 years old. She was a Hemp Spinner. Daniel Grant and family are living in Roster just three doors away from Hughina
1851 Census Latheron. Hughina was a pauper living with her brother Donald Sutherland. They are still neighbours of the Grants.
1851 Census Hughina’s son John McKay age 16 was living with an aunt as his son.
1851 Census Daniel Grant and family were shown as ‘Living in a room’
1851-1855 Hughina died
1855 John McKay died
1861 Census Daniel Grant was a pauper living in Roster - with wife & children
1871 Daniel Grant died 16 Jan 1870 age 83
 |
| Farmland at Roster |
www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk Latheron kirk session, Minutes (1819-1843) (CH2/530/3) pgs 73 - 75 & 128
No comments:
Post a Comment