The graves of the Rev. Harry Stuart and George, his brother, Oathlaw, Forfarshire

Photograph by Ivan Laird, 2019

Harry Stuart, son of John Stuart and Charlotte Boyd Cattanach, was baptised on 13^th December 1801, in Birse Parish, Aberdeenshire:

John Stuart in New Milne had a son baptized named Hary. – Witnefses Al. Petrie & Ann Hay

I remember, in my childhood, begging sometimes of my mother to be let go, and get tales and songs from the “lasses,” in the croft-houses, at their wheel. Very often some three or four of them convened, and span in a neighbour’s house, for company to each other. There was then no end of songs, and ballads, and legends, and countings of “kin,” tales of battles, and marriages, sweethearts, and sermons, just as the idea was started. I heard many a heroic ballad then, which I have never been able to see in print.

The countings of kin referred to no doubted helped to sew the seed of his future fascination with genealogy.

Church of Scotland Minister

After graduating in the Degree of Master of Arts from Marischal College, Aberdeen, in 1820 (as recalled by the Aberdeen Daily Journal, 1^st November 1911), Harry Stuart took up the vocation of a Minister of Religion. The extraordinary levels of energy, tenacity and commitment characterising his varied and conspicuous roles as philanthropist; tireless campaigner for the improvement of the human condition; military, prison and social reformer; published author; family historian; linguist and even prison architect, delineated him as a figure of truly national importance and were regularly chronicled by the newspapers of Scotland and beyond, throughout his lengthy and prolific career.

A powerful insight into Harry Stuart’s circumstances and character is provided by a series of letters written by him to his relatives, the earliest known of which was addressed to his aunt, Elizabeth Catanach, dated 27^th December 1821. Harry was writing on the day on which his elder brother, Robert Stuart, married Mary Ross. Harry stated ‘I have no objections to his marrying’ and expressed a positive opinion of his newly-acquired sister-in-law but since he concludes his comments on the subject, ‘Perhaps he might have waited a year or two longer’, one might so far forget oneself as to doubt his sincerity.

A paragraph is devoted to a substantial sum of money apparently due from the estate of a Mr Ritchie to Harry’s grandfather; from the context, this presumably refers to the recently deceased George Catanach. Mr Ritchie was the uncle of Alexander Glennie of May Bank, with whom Harry was shortly to dine. Mr Glennie had a cousin, ‘Mr Farquharson in Jamaica’, news of whose death he had broken to Harry on the date on which the letter was written.

The deleted reference to Mrs Gibb is also interesting; is there a connection here to his maternal aunt, Margaret Cattanach, who married the Rev. George Gibb? If Harry refers to the lady herself, it seems odd that he does so in such formal terms.

Harry Stuart to Elizabeth Catanach, 27 December 1821

Military Chaplain

For a time, the Rev. Harry Stuart served as military chaplain to the garrison at Aberdeen. Eighteen years later, the Montrose, Arbroath, and Brechin Review, 5^th August 1853, recalled a highly creditable episode from this period:

When, as a barrack-chaplain, he was examined before the Commissioners on Military Punishments in 1835, his evidence was extolled from both sides of the House of Commons as being the best that had been given. The present Commander-in-Chief, then Sir Henry Hardinge, who was himself one of the witnesses, speaking from his place in Parliament, pronounced Mr. Stuart’s testimony to be “one of the best, and practically the most useful, in the blue-book.” To the same effect spoke Earl Grey, then Lord Howick, earnestly recommending honorable members “to read the very instructive evidence contained in the report.” In the voluminous evidence thus emphatically lauded, we find our author recommending the abolition of canteens; the examination of officers before appointment and promotion, the more frequent granting of commissions to men risen from the ranks, the free discharge of the soldier at the end of ten years, medals and rewards for good conduct, regimental libraries, the encouragement of cricket and other sports, military prisons, regimental female schools and military savings banks. Some of these things , we believe, Mr. Stuart was the first to suggest - he pleaded earnestly and effectively for the adoption of them all - and sooner or later all of them have been adopted.

One contemporary report, from the Morning Post, 22^nd March 1836, recorded:

The Rev. Harry Stuart, and surgeon Henry Parkin, speak in very strong terms of the unsatisfactory manner in which the religious instruction of the soldiers is attended to. The first of these witnesses is a Clergyman of the Church of Scotland, who has served some time as chaplain to the garrison at Aberdeen, and the last is surgeon to the division of marines at Woolwich. Mr. Stuart seems to have been actuated by the warmest zeal in the performance of his duties, and he has received the most satisfactory testimonials from several commanding officers of the favourable results of his exertions. There can be no doubt that, in the time of sickness and of suffering, favourable impressions with regard to religious and moral duties are most easily made, and we regret to say that the arrangements now in force upon this head seem to be utterly inadequate to insure the attendance of a respectable Clergyman...

Minister of Oathlaw

Oathlaw Parish Church

Photograph by Ivan Laird, 2019

The Rev. Harry Stuart was ordained as Minister of the small, rural Forfarshire Parish of Oathlaw, on 28^th April 1836 (Aberdeen Journal, 11^th May 1836):

The Presbytery of Forfar met at Oathlaw on the 28th ultimo, for the ordination of Mr Harry Stuart as minister of that parish. The venerable Dr Lyon of Glammis, according to previous appointment, preached upon the occasion, from Rom. x. 15, “How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of Peace, and bring glad tidings of good things.”

For the remainder of his life he resided in the Manse of Oathlaw, where his younger brother, George Stuart, also a lifelong bachelor, was a member of the same household until Harry predeceased him by a week short of three months in 1880.

It is to the immense credit of the reverend gentleman that his multifarious activities were carried on in no sense to the detriment of his parish, as the following extract from an article appearing in the Montrose, Arbroath, and Brechin Review, 5^th August 1853 freely attests:

Thus distinguished as a prisoner-planner and army-reformer, our author has not been less successful in his proper and more ghostly walk. His way of working, when employed as a city missionary, attracted the notice and called forth the marked approbation of an authority of no less eminence than the late Dr. Chalmers. Such, we learn, is the spiritual condition of the parish of which Mr. Stuart has now been minister for nearly twenty years, that the smallness of the stipend is its most serious defect. The congregation is kept well in hand ; and, being happily preserved from what Douce Davie Deans – in the language of Patrick Walker, that ancient Packman - calls “right-hand extremes and left-hand defections,” shows a larger proportion of communicants than any parish in the presbytery or synod of the bounds.

One dimension of the Rev. Harry’s philanthropic activities was highlighted by the Caledonian Mercury, Monday 13^th March 1837:

OATHLAW. - The Reverend Harry Stuart, minister of this parish, has lately collected and forwarded to the Aberdeen Committee for the Distressed Highlanders, from himself and the inhabitants of this parish, the handsome sum of L22 14s. 6d., and also L3 to the Canadian Missions.

The Manse of Oathlaw

Photograph by Ivan Laird, 2019

At a meeting on 3^rd April 1844, the Presbytery of Forfar elected Dr Crawford at Glammis and Mr Harry Stuart at Oathlaw to be their commissioners to the General Assembly. (Greenock Advertiser, 26^th April 1844)

Prison Chaplain

In 1845, the Rev. Harry Stuart was offered the position of chaplain and teacher for Forfar Prison (Aberdeen Journal, Wednesday, June 18, 1845):

FORFARSHIRE PRISONS’ BOARD. – At a recent meeting of the County Prisons’ Board, the Rev. Harry Stuart of Oathlaw was appointed chaplain and teacher for Forfar Prison, at a salary of ten pounds per annum. Mr Stuart has declined accepting the appointment on the terms offered.

The Rev. Harry, however, appears eventually to have relented and continued as prison chaplain for many years thereafter, albeit with periodical expressions of reluctance, in tandem with his position as Minister of Oathlaw.

His comments in favour of prison reform were quoted in the Montrose, Arbroath & Brechin Review and Forfar and Kincardineshire Advertiser on 4^th September 1846. Specific proposals were that if the prisoners were to be properly warmed, then they would be more easily managed. He was further quoted as saying:

I believe there is a question just now about surplus earnings, or about giving a prisoner money when he is released. Could it be compromised by paying all the prisoners’ savings into a house of refuge, where he could get the good of them, without abusing them, until he could provide himself with work? Many would no doubt go on the stroll again, or forfeit their earnings, rather than submit to the rules of a house of refuge. If they did so, this would be a pretty sure criterion that they never would do any good in this country. Of course, exceptions would have to be made in the case of those who had homes or families of their own to go to. How a wretch can do well who comes out of prison, without a penny, I cannot conceive. Might not longer periods of confinement be made beneficial in this way – such a period as would enable them to gain something, to give them another chance of doing well, and that something placed under trustees out of prison, in a house of refuge?

James Robertson, Murderer

The Rev. Harry Stuart played a central role in the events leading up to and including the public execution of James Robertson, on the morning of Friday, 19^th May 1848, at Forfar Prison. The event was widely reported; of which the following article from the Aberdeen Journal, 31^st May 1848, is a worthy sample:

FORFAR. EXECUTION OF JAMES ROBERTSON. James Robertson, lately farm-servant at Findowrie, near Brechin, who was convicted of the murder of his illegitimate child, at last Perth Circuit Court, suffered the extreme penalty of the law on the morning of Friday, 19th inst. The apparatus of death was erected on the east side of the Prison gate, and a large space of ground in front of the Prison was enclosed by a paling, with a smaller enclosure closely boarded in within a few feet of the Prison walls, which fenced in the gate, and extended a short distance to the eastward of the scaffold. About seven o’clock, the Magistrates, the Town-Clerk, and other officials, arrived at the prison, in order that, as commanded, they should witness the execution of the sentence which had been passed upon the unfortunate man. Between seven and eight Robertson was pinioned, and conducted by the Chaplain into the committee-room of the jail, where, in the presence of the officials, he joined in devotional exercises, which were conducted by the Rev. Mr. Stuart of Oathlaw, the Chaplain of the jail, and the Rev. Mr Stevenson of Forfar. Mr Stuart gave out Ps. ciii, 8-12; Mr Stevenson prayed; Mr Stuart read Ps. 11, and the xv. Chapter of Luke, and then prayed. The exercises were concluded by singing a portion of that striking and beautiful hymn, commencing, at the prisoner’s request,- “The hour of my departure’s come: I hear the voice that calls me home.” At the termination of the services – about a quarter past eight o’clock – the Magistrates and the other officials, the convict, and Mr Stuart, appeared on the scaffold. As illustrative of the resignation and firmness of Robertson at this awful moment, it may be stated that he remarked to Mr McKessock, the keeper of the prison, “When you see any of my friends, tell them that this is the happiest morning of my life.” When Robertson was pinioned, Mr Stuart put his arm around his waist, and never took it away till he was placed on the drop, - not that any assistance was required, for, as just stated, he evinced great firmness, but merely, we assume, to give him, if possible, encreased (sic) courage to meet his fate. On the scaffold, Mr Stuart offered up a prayer, at the conclusion of which Robertson took his place upon the drop, when Mr Stuart knelt with his back to the criminal and continued in prayer while the rope was adjusting till the bolt was withdrawn, and the criminal died without a struggle. After hanging the usual time the body was cut down, and buried, in conformity with the sentence, within the precincts of the jail. What seems remarkable in Robertson’s case is, that although he admitted the premeditated murder of his child in his confession before the Magistrates when taken into custody, and although all the evidence and circumstances clearly bore this out, he uniformly denied any premeditation of the murder during the whole of his imprisonment, although many attempts were made by Mr Stuart and others to bring him to an acknowledgement of this. He admitted the justice of his sentence according to the evidence, and that the life of the child lay at his door through his carelessness only; and he was several weeks in confinement before he could be brought to think that his life was at all in danger. He always maintained that his words of confession were misunderstood, and made to imply more than they meant. In prison he gave the most earnest heed to his religious instructions. Till the last few nights he took his usual time of sleep; but as soon as he awoke, his Bible or some other book was in his hand. Until the last week of his life he was visited only by the Rev. Mr Stuart; but during it Mr Stuart invited, with the concurrence of the prisoner, Messrs Stevenson, Clugston, Foote, and McCosh, and Smith, all of whom were well pleased with his progress in saving knowledge, and his frame of mind. Mr Stuart visited him daily, and oftener, to prepare him for the worst; and since his conviction he has spent several nights in prison with him. Mr Stuart left him, at his own desire, at midnight on the night preceding the execution, as he lay down to take some rest. When asked if the hammering of the workmen erecting the scaffold annoyed him, he answered, “Not at all – I have done with the world and with this body too.” Mr S. again visited him between two and three, when he awoke. From a marked peculiarity of mind, considerable fears were entertained that Robertson’s courage would either entirely fail, or that he would become desperate, but these fears proved groundless. He expressed again and again great gratitude to the Chaplain, and repeatedly promised to him to endeavour to show the power of converting grace in meeting death, as the best return he could make. The Chaplain took in a basin of tea to him about half-past six, which he drank. From three in the morning till he took his place on the drop, he repeated with great earnestness, after the Chaplain, all the scriptures and prayers. Ever since his apprehension and conviction, Robertson has evinced great simplicity and softness of manner; and he has warmly expressed his gratitude for any attentions – even the smallest – which were paid to him. At noon, on Wednesday last, the miserable man was visited by his aged mother, who was accompanied by one of her daughters and two of her sons – the sister and brothers of Robertson. The mother has visited him three times since his conviction. We need scarcely say that on all the occasions, especially the last parting scene, the meetings were truly affecting. In the course of the present week he wrote letters to several of his friends. The contents of these chiefly consisted in warnings against Sabbath desecration, disobedience to parents, and giving way to the desires of the flesh and the mind. They also expressed an earnest wish that he had his life to begin, and to spend it as he had been often counselled by his parents to spend it, the neglect of whose advice he seems to have bitterly deplored. He was kept in ignorance that any exertion was being made to save his life; but we understand that Robertson entertained a hope that his life would be saved, from an expression used by the Judge in passing sentence; but he has, since the letter which was received in answer to the application for a commutation of the sentence, evinced apparent resignation; and has employed his time in eagerly perusing the Sacred Writings. Since his condemnation, the following document has been subscribed by Robertson. It was commenced by the culprit ; but he became so enervated, that he asked the assistance of Mr McKessock, the governor of the jail, who concluded it. The original was subscribed by Robertson, in presence of Mr McKessock:- “Mr Harry Stuart, Chaplain for the Prison of Forfar. Oh! he has been a dutiful friend to me, and great attendance he has paid to me ; for night and day he has run for my good and the salvation of my soul, and he has shewn me what I have need of – and I had need of him – and may the Lord Jesus bestow many a sweet blessing upon him both in this life and that which is to come – and may he be enabled to show many a poor sinner the way to salvation, as he has shewn me, and that they may walk in the path of righteousness. Oh, Lord! May you lead them and guide them through this weary pilgrimage ; and may Jesus Christ restore them to himself, and be an ornament of salvation. I sincerely hope all who may know of my unhappy fate may look unto the Lord Jesus in the days of their health and strength, and not put off until reminded of their end on a bed of sickness and death. Oh! may my fellow-servants take warning by this my unhappy end, and fly to the Lord our God, who is always willing and able to pardon the chief of sinners. Yet the Lord has been merciful to me, and given me strength to call on him in this my time of troubles. The Lord our God will also strengthen all who call on his name. May the hearts of many be led to the Lord through this solemn warning – a warning which ought not to be scoffed at by many of my acquaintances, and for whom I have an earnest desire that they may seek the Lord while he is to be found. Oh! that my fellow-servants could but see the horrors of the end of a sinful life, and repent ere it is too late. May those who follow their lustful desires and riotous lives, in me see that sin meets its reward either in this life or that to come ; and may the young men and women walk in fear of the Lord. My earnest and solemn wish is, that farmers and others employing the young and unthoughtful of both sexes, place a barrier between them, and prevent them coming together as much as possible, as this has been my ruin ; and may the young and unthoughtful in me see that God will not allow the wicked to go unpunished. Oh! may the young men who are living in the bothies take warning, and be guarded against the wiles of wicked and lustful desires : may they be led to see that this is not their resting place, and that they who live only for this life have only a life of sorrow. “To the Rev. Mr Stuart of Oathlaw, I owe much for his attention and instructions. He along with the other reverend gentlemen who have visited me in this my earthly cell, have given me a hope of a glorious immortality. I cannot express my gratitude for their attention and kindness : words cannot express what I feel for their attention and kindness in learning me the way of salvation ; but God in his mercies will reward them. (Signed) JAMES ROBERTSON.” In looking at the above statement of the prisoner, it will be observed that he acknowledged the good he got from Mr Stuart in spiritual things. We also heard of Mr Stuart taking the most lively interest in the whole case of the unfortunate man, as he went over all the burghs in the county, as also to Edinburgh and other places at a distance, sparing neither toil nor expence (sic), that everything in his favour might be properly and favourably represented in the highest quarter ; but we believe he only did in this instance, as he does in every other where distress has a chance of being relieved – disregarding both pocket, and mind, and body, thanks or reward. In looking at the above statement, we at once see the flagrant evils of the bothy system, and the necessity of some remedy. The following statement, which was taken down at the dictation of the prisoner, on the morning of Thursday – the day prior to the execution – must be viewed as an awful comment upon these evils:- “Oh! Mr Stuart, that I had done as my pious parents wanted me. They wanted me to learn a trade and to take more schooling, but I had no inclination to do anything but work horses. I was fee’d away when I was fourteen years of age. I lived always after that in a bothy, where I never saw any good, but much evil. Those that have got some good from their parents are laughed at till they go on like others,- not reading their Bible, not going to the kirk nor the sacrament ; and so they speak all kinds of bad language, and do all kinds of bad things. Some are good. Our masters never curb us for a wonder ; and so they care no more for us than our horses. But we would not mind them if they did. We were always flitting about and cared for nobody. We fee’d away in the markets to masters that we never had seen or cared for ; and so we grew regardless of God and man. Oh! Sir, that ye would warn them by me and my end – both masters and servants, men and women – to live more in the fear of God. The women-servants have been my ruin. O! warn them not to come near the bothies, and so entice away young boys. I have no ill to any one ; but some kent how they laid snares for me when I was only a boy. I hope they will bring up my children in the fear of God, and so take warning from me. Oh! that I had my life to begin again, and to warn others to flee from temptation and sinful ways, and not to put off and depend on a death-bed repentance, for fear they be too late. JAMES ROBERTSON.” The number of those who witnessed the execution has been variously estimated, but in our opinion it amounted to about two thousand five hundred – the great majority being females and children. They conducted themselves in the most orderly manner ; not a symptom of levity was displayed ; and, after the execution, they returned to their respective homes, seemingly much impressed with the melancholy scene. Robertson has left nine brothers and sisters,- he was the youngest of the family, and was a good-looking young man, about twenty-five years of age.

In 1851, the Reverend Harry Stuart was entered as 47, the ‘Minister of Oathlaw Estab. Church’, born in Birse, Aberdeenshire. His brother, George, was 39, ‘Parochial Schoolmaster’, also a native of Birse. Also residing in the household were Elizabeth Kydd, unmarried, 39, a housekeeper, born in Craig, Forfarshire, and Mary Lindsay, also unmarried, 17, a house servant, born in Forfarshire.

Genealogist

By this time, the Rev. Harry Stuart was already in active pursuit of his ancestral roots, as attested by a letter addressed to him by J. A. Gordon, of Knockespoch, Rhynie, discussing their common ancestors, the Gordons of Terpersie and of Lesmoir.

A letter from the Rev. Harry Stuart to his brother, Robert Stuart, at Newmill, Birse, written at Dunrobin Castle on 28^th August 1854, describes a meeting with the Duke of Sutherland, himself a descendent of the Gordons, presumably on his mother’s side. In the course of this encounter, the Duke showed Harry ‘an old curious book written by Gordon of Lesmoir’.

Extracts from correspondence, various

Agricultural Reformer

The Montrose, Arbroath, and Brechin Review, 5^th August 1853, referred to a talk which the Rev. Harry Stuart had given some five or six weeks previously, i.e. towards the end of June:

The pastor, thus prosperous in his own sphere, undertook, some five or six weeks ago, to address the newly-formed Agricultural Association of his county on the condition of the farm-labourer in Scotland. He was warned that he must not speak more than twenty minutes – he spoke for an hour and a half ; but such were the sound sense and sterling worth of his matter that, in spite of sundry sins of manner – a rough, unhewn style, and a broad Buchan vernacular – he kept the attention of his hearers alive to the last, and was rewarded when he sat down with something more substantial than the customary vote of thanks and round of applause. Mr. Chalmers of Aldbar moved that the reverend gentleman should be requested to print his paper ; and the proposition, involving a guarantee that the purses of those who concurred in it should be responsible for the risk, was agree to with due deliberation. It is the pamphlet which the farmers and country gentlemen of Angus have thus stamped with their sanction, that we have now to commend to the consideration of our readers.

The result of this initiative was a substantial book, confusingly referred to in the papers as a ‘pamphlet’, Agricultural Labourers, As They Were, Are, and Should Be, In their Social Condition, published by the Angus Agricultural Association, in conjunction with William Blackwood & Sons, of Edinburgh and London, in 1853. It drew favourable reviews, including three-and-a-half columns in the Edinburgh Courant, 2^nd August 1853.

The following extract from the Edinburgh Courant was quoted in a front page advert in The Scotsman, 6^th August 1853, priced at one shilling:

Thoroughly original, and not less thoroughly practical, full of shrewd remark and racy anecdote – the ripe fruit of a clear eye and a fertile ever busy brain

Probably the most remarkable accomplishment of a thoroughly distinguished career is that the Rev. Harry appears actually to have designed a model prison. The Edinburgh Courant, 2^nd August 1853, quoted by the Montrose, Arbroath, and Brechin Review, 5^th August 1853 reported, in connection with its review of his book:

This is the pamphlet of a somewhat remarkable man. It is not every country minister that can build a jail – much less a jail which shall extort from the Prison Inspector the praise of being the best in Britain. But of the County Prison of Angus, constructed the other day at a cost of about £2,000, after the plans and under the superintendence of the minister of Oathlaw, Sir John Kincaid writes in his last annual report - “Taking it as a whole, I am of the opinion that there is no prison in the kingdom in which the arrangements are so well calculated to carry out the true objects of imprisonment.” This high compliment may, perhaps, help to reconcile the reverend architect to the remembrance of the four thousand miles which, we have been told, he had to walk to and fro between Finhaven and Forfar before he brought his work to a successful close. But our prison builder is no stranger to compliments.

The crucial importance, for present purposes, of Agricultural Labourers etc., taken together with the extensive genealogical study undertaken by his brother George, can scarcely be overstated; it contains first-hand biographical information, mostly anecdotal in nature, concerning various family members, particularly his maternal grandfather, George Cattanach; father, John Stuart, and mother, Charlotte Boyd Cattanach, thus firmly securing the connection to Harry’s great-grandfather, Charles Gordon, VI of Terpersie, which would otherwise have been lost or at best obscured.

A closely related project was a Prospectus of a General Association for Scotland to improve the Dwellings and Social condition of Agricultural Labourers, prepared by the Rev. Harry Stuart and sent to Prince Albert, through Col. Phipps, on 8^th October 1853. A deputation, consisting of Sir John Stuart Forbes and the Rev. Harry himself, secured an interview with the Prince three days later, on the morning of Tuesday, 11^th October 1853, in the course of which their royal host manifested his interested attentions (Aberdeen Journal, 12^th October 1853):

THE COURT AT BALMORAL. Yesterday morning, at half-past ten o’clock, Sir John Stuart Forbes, Bart., and the Rev. Harry Stuart of Oathlaw, had an audience of Prince Albert by appointment, as a deputation from the Projectors of “the National Association for improving the condition of Agricultural Labourers in Scotland, especially as regards their dwellings,” and were very graciously received.

Amongst the various social evils condemned by the Rev. Harry Stuart was the bothy system of accommodation for unmarried workers, in which he was no doubt informed by the sad case of James Robertson. Related objectives were improved housing and sanitary conditions.

The Aberdeen Journal, 28^th December 1853, apparently reiterating statements made on the day following the meeting, Wednesday, 12^th, recalled that;

the Prince (had entered) fully and freely into the whole scheme, expressing entire approbation of the Prospectus, and his pleasure to become Patron of the Association when it should be properly organised.

The Rev. Harry Stuart was amongst those present at a public meeting of landowners and other interested parties, at the Hopetoun Rooms, Edinburgh, on Tuesday, 10^th January 1854, chaired by the Duke of Buccleuch, with the object of forming a general association for the improvement of the dwellings and domestic condition of agricultural labourers and other farm employees.

As reported by the Brechin Advertiser and Angus and Mearns Intelligencer, 17^th January 1854:

The Rev. HARRY STUART of Oathlaw, author of the pamphlet on the improvement of the condition of our agricultural labourers, next addressed the meeting, and expressed the gratification it gave him to find that at last there was the promise of something effectual being done in the matter. While agricultural improvement had proceeded with railway speed, the whole permanent condition of the farm labourer had been allowed to go to pieces ; and unless landlords put their shoulders to the wheel, the social machine in its downward course would be such as to render the exertions of the religious teachers of all denominations amongst that portion of the community wholly powerless. He found that the building of a cottage was still a sort of vexed question, and chiefly because it was still a puzzle in the art of buying and selling how to procure a good article at a very low price. What he would suggest would be the establishment of an office in Edinburgh for the reception of plans, specifications, and model cottages, and the appointment of a person to explain the same. In this way, proprietors and others would become, in a short time, tolerably well acquainted with the nature of the improvements they ought to make, and obtain all the information necessary... Sir J. OGILVIE proposed a vote of thanks to the Rev. Harry Stuart for his exertions in the cause, and for this admirable pamphlet on the subject. He did not know, he said, whether most to admire the modesty with which the pamphlet was written, the benevolence which pervaded it, or the Christian spirit which breathed through it. The resolution, which was unanimously agreed to, was acknowledged by Mr. Stuart.

A second, enlarged, edition of Agricultural Labourers etc. was published in 1854; the Report of the Proceedings of the Scottish National Association for the Improvement of the Domestic Condition of Agricultural Labourers in Scotland was appended. It was again advertised for sale at the price of one shilling, e. g. in the Aberdeen Herald and General Advertiser, 1^st April 1854.

During 1854, The Rev. Harry Stuart sojourned in Lhanbryde, Morayshire. As reported by the Banffshire Journal & General Advertiser, 3^rd October 1854:

LHANBRYDE. – Our readers who have been in Morayshire must have been struck with the beautiful village of Lhanbryde, newly erected by the Trustees of the Earl of Fife on the site of the old village. The Elgin Courant mentions that the Rev. Harry Stuart of Oathlaw was lately the guest of the Rev. Mr Brander of Duffus. Mr Stuart then visited the pretty and picturesque village of Lhanbryde, recently so tastefully remodelled and beautified under the auspices of Mr Walker, Leuchars House and greatly admired the cottages erected there for the accommodation of the labourers in the vicinity – very different certainly from the turf huts, with their adjacent “middens,” which formerly occupied the site of these snug and pleasant dwellings. He also made diligent inquiry into the nature of the accommodation provided for the rural working classes in the county of Moray, and expressed high commendation of the interest and ability with which the subject of lodging farm labourers, so as most to promote their comfort and elevate their moral condition, was discussed by the Morayshire Farmer Club this spring.

The Dundee Courier, 28^th May 1856, reported:

FORFARSHIRE PRISONS’ BOARD. The reports of the District Committees were then read and approved of. From the report of the Forfar Committee, it appeared they had continued the Rev Harry Stuart of Oathlaw as chaplain to the Forfar Prison, at a salary of £25. Mr Stuart, in his letter accepting of the appointment, expressed his gratification at the complimentary terms in which the Board had urged him to continue his services, but at the same time expressed his readiness to withdraw whenever a suitable person could be procured as town’s missionary for Forfar, who could in addition perform the duties of Jail Chaplain.

The elevated circles in which the Rev. Harry moved were highlighted by an anecdote appearing in the Montrose, Arbroath, and Brechin Review, 16^th October 1857:

On the forenoon of Tuesday last, the Countess of Airlie, accompanied by the Countess of Cork, Lady Harriet de Burgh, with the Rev. Harry Stuart, Oathlaw, left Cortachy Castle, to spend the day, and visit the famed scenery about Airlie Castle, so renowned in history and song. They had not reached half-way when, unfortunately, one of the springs which supports the front part of the carriage gave way. Returning to Kirriemuir, a tradesman was immediately set to work to have things put to rights. The ladies, however, on being informed that there would be a detention of a few hours, immediately decided with the rev. gentleman on taking the road on foot. Giving the coachmen orders to follow when ready, they set out on the journey, a distance of six miles, which they accomplished with ease and pleasure. One thing most propitious was that the weather was most delightful.

The Rev. Harry Stuart was once again to the fore, in establishing an evening class at Luthermuir in December 1859, as reported by the Montrose, Arbroath, and Brechin Review, 16^th December 1859:

LUTHERMUIR.- An evening class, having for its object the education and mental improvement of young men, was instituted in the Public School here, on Monday evening last. There were present on the occasion – Sir John S. Forbes, Bart. of Fettercairn, the patron ; the Rev. Harry Stuart, of Oathlaw ; the Rev. J. C. M‘Clure, Marykirk ; the Rev. Mr McLean, Brechin ; and a pretty numerous audience. After prayer had been offered up by the Rev. H. Stuart, Sir John Forbes delivered an admirable and very appropriate address ; and elucidated the nature of the intended class, intimating that competitive examinations were to be held, and prize awards bestowed, at stated periods, on the most deserving students, and that, as it improved and developed itself, still further encouragement would be given ; and concluded by expressing his confidence that under the able management of Mr Laing, every justice would be done to the talents of the young men. The Rev. Mr M‘Clure, in an excellent speech, moved the thanks of the meeting to Sir John, a motion which was heartily applauded by all present ; and after blessing being pronounced, the meeting separated. We augur well for a class begun under such distinguished patronage, and trust that every young man in the district having spare time at his disposal will be found taking advantage of it.

In the eyes of the Dunfermline Press, 11^th October 1860, the Rev. Harry was ‘that benevolent old man’, a tribute no doubt richly merited; yet for all the titled patronage which had readily flocked to his banner, little had been accomplished in the way of tangible progress towards the declared objective of improving the lot of the agricultural labourer, as was only too apparent after the whole issue had been raked up anew by a fellow clergyman, the Rev. Dr Begg:

The rev. gentleman only stated what he has often stated before – that the bothy system was one of the most unmitigated social evils with which the rural population of Scotland is cursed. In terms of indignation, no doubt, but not stronger indignation than facts warranted, did Dr Begg denounce the miserable economy which, shrinking from the erection of suitable cottages for the tillers of the soil, huddled six or eight ploughmen into one miserable hut called a bothy. The Doctor is not the first clergyman who has awoke to the gigantic evils of this modern innovation. A parish minister, the Rev. Harry Stuart of Oathlaw was, we believe, the earliest to break ground upon the question. No one could look upon that benevolent old man without honouring his compassion. He spoke when others were silent. When others were contending in hottest polemical strife, he was quietly noting the cankerworm at the root of our social system in the rural districts. Through his good offices the Cottage Improvement Association was formed. Unfortunately the mass of the people know little or nothing of the existence of that society. It meets periodically under the patronage, and has its meetings graced by the presence, of the nobles of our land ; but it does nothing. It has indeed collected a good deal of information about how cottages may be improved, and has prepared some good models upon which new cottages may be erected. Any one disposed to save the price of a plan may, through its instrumentality, have a choice of plans gratis. But the misfortune was that under the present law of Scotland, or at least what was Scotch law until Mr Dunlop’s Act was passed, the whole thing was a putting of the cart before the horse. Whatever an association might determine about improvement, the Court of Session said nay. The thing cannot be done, it is not legal ; the law of entail forbids improvement. It may be all perfectly true what you say about the sorry state of the tenements in which industry burrows, but that is nothing to us ; what we have to do is to see that you stand by the old landmarks and abide by the ancient paths. The result was that though a few cottages were built by the more favourably placed among the more benevolent of our Scottish landlords, the Cottage Improvement Association was a society that existed chiefly upon paper. It was, no doubt, all very fine – seemed, indeed, very condescending – to observe the Duke of Buccleuch and the principal nobility of Scotland met together once a year to listen to the annual report of the benevolent parson, and to say to the Scottish peasantry, “You have our good wishes, friends.” Having observed how from year to year that these nobles did nothing, Dr Begg – a man in whom are met some of the best characteristics of the Scottish minister – resolved that the time was come when a clean end must be made of this mealy-mouthed mode of attacking a national scandal. In dealing with the bothy, Dr Begg had no fear of Dukes before his eyes. The birkie ca’ed a laird had no terrors for him. The hollow-hearted selfishness and rapacity of landlordism were laid bare with remorseless faithfulness. Men learnt for the first time that titled aristocrats – wearing the fairest historic names – were stained by practising this heartless and immoral system.

A somewhat more optimistic picture was painted in the account of a well-attended meeting held in Edinburgh on Wednesday, 9^th January 1861, Mr Stirling, of Keir, M.P. in the chair, at which a letter of apology was received from the Rev. Harry Stuart (Dundee & Cupar Advertiser, 11^th January 1861);

in which he states his cordial approval of the object of the meeting, and mentions that he “has it in view to write a book on cottage building and the whole subject.” The Chairman passed a high eulogium on the Rev. Mr Stuart for his exertions in the cause of cottage improvement, and stated that during the six or seven years that the Association, which was formed at his suggestion, has existed, the number of really good cottages has been doubled.

The Rev. Harry Stuart was noticed for a second time in the same article, in connection with a committee established for the carrying out of the objects of the meeting.

In 1861, Oathlaw Manse was entered as having nine rooms with one or more windows. ‘Rev^d. Harry Stuart’ was 57 and a ‘Minister of Established Church’. George, 49, was a ‘Teacher of Parish School’. Elizabeth Kydd, their ‘house keeper’, was entered as 47. The fourth member of the household on this occasion was Mary Ann Murray, 17, a dairy maid, also born in Forfarshire. All four were unmarried.

The following report, apparently referring to Wednesday, 15^th, appeared in the Aberdeen Journal, 22^nd January 1862:

AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS’ DWELLINGS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION. – The annual meeting of this Association was held on Wednesday afternoon, in the Highland Society’s Museum, George IV. Bridge, Edinburgh. The Duke of Buccleuch occupied the chair. The report for the past year was adopted, and addresses were delivered by Lord Kinnaird, Sir John S. Forbes, Mr Dunlop, M.P.; Mr Wemyss of Wemyss Castle ; the Rev. Dr Grant, Edinburgh ; Rev. Harry Stuart, Oathlaw, and other gentlemen.

The Rev. Harry Stuart received an honourable mention from Andrew Jervise, F.S.A. Scot., in Epitaphs & Inscriptions from Burial Grounds & Old Buildings in the North-Eaft of Scotland, with Hiftorical, Biographical, Genealogical, and Antiquarian Notes (Edinburgh: Edmonston and Douglas, 1875), at p. 266, in an entry pertaining to his grandparents, George Cattanach and Helen Gordon, and great-grandather, Charles Gordon, VI of Terpersie:

Helen Gordon was the grandmother of the Rev. Harry Stuart, minister of Oathlaw, who has done so much to improve the condition of agricultural labourers, &c.

Forfar Infirmary

The Rev. Harry Stuart was also a prime mover in the establishment of the Forfar Infirmary. He was listed as the Honorary Secretary to the Subscribers to this Institution, at the Annual General Meeting held in the Town Hall on Friday, 31^st January 1862, at noon. The Chairman concluded his remarks with a glowing and no doubt deserved tribute (Dundee Advertiser, 3^rd February 1862):

I cannot conclude without noticing the obligations we are under to the Rev. Mr Stuart. (Hear, hear.) If one gentlemen more than another is entitled to the merit of having originated and carried through this scheme, it is, undoubtedly, the minister of Oathlaw ; and our sense of the obligation is only deepened by the fact that this is only one of many instances in which, with many difficulties to contend with, he has laboured for the good of the poor and helpless. (Hear, hear.)

Letters addressed to the Hon. Colonel Sir John Ogilvy Bt., Forfarshire Rifle Volunteers, are held in the Angus Archives, the first, dated 15^th March 1862, from John Kinloch, Logie, Kirriemuir (ACC10/4/9/36), the second, dated the 24^th, from the War Office, London (ACC10/4/4/57), approving the appointment of the Reverend Harry Stuart as Honorary Chaplain to the 2^nd Administrative Battalion of the Forfarshire Rifle Volunteers.

Another of the Rev. Harry’s proposals, reported upon by the Montrose, Arbroath, and Brechin Review, 27^th March 1863, was the adaptation of an airing gallery in Forfar Prison as a prison chapel. He expressed his opposition to the separate box system previously favoured elsewhere; enabling the men to sit together would add to the solemnity and impressiveness of divine services.

Speaking at the annual meeting of the Agricultural Labourers’ Association, held at Edinburgh on Wednesday, 10^th February 1864, the Rev. Harry Stuart drew attention to a recent outbreak of diptheria, which had grievously affected his own parish, where, in two cottages, there had been eight cases, five of them fatal. The disease was particularly prevalent among labourers’ children. He linked the condition to damp dwellings; those constructed in recent decades were even worse than traditional turf and stone huts. He strongly advocated the use of asphalt or some kind of lining for the inner walls, to keep down damp. (Coleraine Chronicle, 20^th February 1864)

Hypothec Commission

On Wednesday, 1^st March 1865, the Rev. Harry Stuart gave evidence before the Hypothec Commission concerning a proposed change to the law. His testimony contains, inter alia, a wealth of autobiographical detail together with clear insights into his personal circumstances (Dundee Courier and Argus, 27^th March 1865):

THE HYPOTHEC COMMISSION. EVIDENCE OF REV. HARRY STUART. WEDNESDAY, March 1, 1865. The Commission met this day. Present – Mr Campbell Swinton (in the chair), Hon. Mr Carnegie, Mr Murray, Mr Fleming, Mr Hope, Mr McLagan, Mr Curror. Rev. Harry Stuart examined by the CHAIRMAN - I am parish minister of Oathlaw, Forfarshire, and have been so twenty-eight years. I have devoted my attention very much to the interests of the agricultural classes. About twelve years ago I wrote on the social condition of the agricultural labourers, with a view to its improvement, and I then made inquiries as to their condition over the whole country. I visited most of the counties in Scotland, and had conversations with landlords, tenants and labourers, and especially with the smaller tenants. I am Honorary Secretary of the Association for the Improvement of the Dwellings of the Labouring Classes. My parish is a small one, and purely agricultural. The population is 400. There are about two dozen occupiers of land in it, whose rents vary from L.400 to L. 6. There are only seven two-horse farmers, and about as many crofters who don’t keep horses. None of them pay a rent till they reap a crop. I never let my glebe, but I never farmed it myself. I employ a small farmer beside me who has not full work for two horses, and he has farmed it for twenty years. He was bred a joiner ; but on his father’s death he took his farm, which was in a wretched condition, and everybody thought he could do nothing with it, but he now raises the heaviest crops in the parish, I believe. I had a note from a commissioner on a large estate some years ago, in which he stated that blacksmiths, joiners, and tradesmen made the best farmers for these small possessions. All the two-horse farmers have been successful, and are in a prosperous state. I am decidedly of opinion that it is desirable, for the general social and agricultural position of the country, that small farmers should be encouraged. The Poor Law Commission got abundant evidence as to that twenty-two years ago. When I made my inquiries twelve years ago, I found that the universal complaint on the part of the smaller class of farm-servants was, they had no prospects of rising. I found that in East Lothian, for example, they said they could not look forward to any way of doing of their own ; and that they were obliged to keep their sons at home to be bondagers, when they would rather go to a trade or emigrate, to save them from taking in persons whom they knew nothing about. In my county it is a universal complaint by these people that they can look to nothing better ; hence they emigrate. Almost every boy, that gets a good education at the country school, either emigrates or goes to learn a trade. In the county of Forfar there are few small farms, except in Glenisla and Cortachy and the uplands, but not on the sea-coast. I would deprecate any change in the law of hypothec, if it had any effect in preventing the well-doing farm labourers from getting a small farm or croft, and rising to a larger farm ; and I think the abolition of the law would have that effect…

Andrew Brown, Murderer

On Wednesday, 31^st January 1866, the Rev. Harry Stuart again officated at a public execution, that of Andrew Brown; an excellent general account of the case is given in the Liverpool Mercury, 2^nd February 1866:

EXECUTION AT MONTROSE. Shortly after two o’clock on Wednesday afternoon, Andrew Brown was executed for the murder of Captain John Greig, of the schooner Nymph, on the 6th of September last. Brown was the mate of the vessel, and on the afternoon of the day in question, while the Nymph was off the promontory of Redhead, some distance from Montrose, on her way to London, with a cargo of wood, he took a hatchet and buried it in the head of the captain, who was sleeping on deck. The first blow, which must have caused instant death, was followed by two others in rapid succession before the other seamen on board could interfere. Brown at the time was drunk, and assigned as a reason for the horrible act that the deceased should have given him a glass of whisky. He then took command of the vessel, and seems to have quite overcome the two seamen comprising the remainder of the crew. He put the vessel about and steered her for Stonehaven, where his mother lived. The port was reached at midnight, and Brown went ashore and horrified his mother by saying, “Mother, there’s eighteen pence ; it’s the last money you’ll get from me, for I’ve killed the master.” In the meantime information had been given to the police, who at once arrested the murderer.

The Rev. Harry Stuart took a close personal interest in the case and was called as a defence witness when it came before the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh. However, his testimony was disallowed by the Lord Justice-Clerk, who adjudged it hearsay (Montrose, Arbroath, and Brechin Review, 12^th January 1866):

Rev. Harry Stuart, minister of the parish of Oathlaw and chaplain of Forfar prison, deponed – I have been chaplain in the prison of Forfar for the last twenty-five years, and previous to that I was chaplain to the troops in Aberdeen. In the course of my chaplaincy I have come in contact with several thousand prisoners. By the 48th prison rule for Scotland it is part of my duty to keep a book, and enter into that book a report of the early training, the habits, the connections, and apparent cause of the crime laid to the charge of each prisoner, such as I myself can ascertain. I endeavoured to ascertain what the character of Brown was. The first thing that struck me when I went into his cell was, that he was not in the very least like the man that I expected to find – not at all like the man who would have committed the crime which was laid to his charge. The witness was here requested to withdraw. The Lord Justice-Clerk said, that, as chaplain of the prison, the particulars which that gentleman gathered to form his opinion were the results of mere hearsay. The prisoner’s counsel might as well propose to bring up a phrenologist to tell them the shape of the prisoner’s head. His Lordship asked if Mr Nicolson had any other question to ask. Mr Nicolson said he was going to ask the witness questions regarding the particulars mentioned. The Lord Justice-Clerk – They are not questions upon insanity.

Brown was found guilty and although two members of the jury recommended him to mercy, he was sentenced to death. The Rev. Harry next petitioned for a commutation of the sentence, as reported in the Dundee Courier & Argus, 20^th January 1866. The following letter was addressed to Provost Mitchell of Montrose:

Forfar Prison, 15th January 1866. Dear Sir,- I am quiet (sic) sure the object of my writing to you will excuse this liberty. It is in regard to the convict Brown, now under my spiritual care, in the prison of Forfar. I beg to enclose for your favourable consideration a copy of a petition now being signed in Forfar. From all the circumstances of the case, it clearly comes under the 2d class of murder, recommended by the recent report of the Royal Commission on Murders. Before his trial, I paid Brown thirty-eight visits – of considerable length – and kept a faithful journal of each visit – all that passed between him and myself in his cell, and of the state of his mind. I purposely abstained from reading anything about the circumstances of the murder, and knew them not till I read them the day after his conviction. I came to be decidedly of opinion that he was such a weak-minded man as could commit such a crime without any reason – on some sudden impulse arising from disease going on his brain. But as I was not a medical man, my evidence was refused by the Court. Yet, the Solicitor-General and many other advocates thought it quite competent. Great stress was laid on his being able to steer the vessel after the crime. Why - The commission of such a crime has been known to restore the equilibrium of the brain on the instant, and his calmness after is rather a proof of the disease. I have been strongly advised to forward this petition to your care, in the hope that you will procure as many influential signatures to it as possible, and transmit it to the Home Office with all convenient speed. - With every apology, I am, yours faithfully, HARRY STUART.

The Rev. Harry’s efforts attracted little public support; the Liverpool Mercury resumes the story of the disposal of Brown’s case;

in consequence of a belief that he was insane, strenuous efforts were made to induce the Government to spare his life. Another reason for those efforts was that the prisoner would have to be conveyed to Montrose from the prison of Forfar, a distance of 20 miles, on the day of execution. In reply to the representations made to him on the subject, Sir G. Grey declined to interfere with the execution of the sentence of death, on the ground that the defence failed to prove that the prisoner was insane. The fact of this refusal was communicated to Brown by the Rev. Harry Stuart, of Oathlaw, on Saturday evening, and the convict became greatly depressed in consequence.

The Dundee Courier & Argus, 31^st January 1866, offering the further commentary that a visit by the Rev. Harry Stuart to Brown on Tuesday 30^th, the day before the execution, had left him convinced that the condemned man was impressed with a due sense of his situation, calls into question this sequence of events:

It had been stated that the prisoner was made aware of his certain fate on Saturday. It now appears that it was only on Sunday afternoon after he had attended Divine service in the chapel that he was made aware that the efforts in his behalf had been unsuccessful. He certainly felt moved, but not to any extent, and seems resigned to his fate.

The Scotsman, 1^st February 1866, chronicled the continuing role of the Rev. Harry and his reverend colleague, Mr Waterston:

Mr Stuart, the chaplain of the prison, has been unremitting in his attentions to the prisoner, frequently sitting with him for many hours at a time ; and Mr Waterston, the Free Church minister of Forfar, has also been very kind and attentive. Brown all along received their ministrations with becoming reverence ; and, latterly, with such appreciative regard as to awaken a confidence in the minds of the reverend gentlemen that he was sincerely penitent and that he entertained the hope of forgiveness of his sins. Although a man unusually undemonstrative, and almost morose in his demeanour, he has, particularly within the last few days, since he received intimation of the failure of the application and petition which were sent to the Home Secretary for a commutation of his sentence, been very frank in his communications with his religious advisers on the subject of his state of mind, and has repeatedly assured Mr Stuart that he was resigned to his fate, and had now no wish to live.

He acknowledged having said to several of the witnesses examined at the trial “that he had killed the captain for an old grudge,” but denied that that was a true statement. Being questioned on this point, he stated to Mr Stuart that he had been led to make the statement solely from a kind of feeling that he would require to say something to justify himself when he was asked to assign a motive for what he had done, and that he thought that would “gie him a better chance.” He farther assured Mr Stuart that he had had no cause to cherish any ill-feeling against Mr Greig, as it was not true that he had led him into bad company, excepting on one occasion.

The Liverpool Mercury describes the manner in which Andrew Brown, on Monday, 29^th, took leave of his family, and of the Rev. Mr Waterston:

On Monday afternoon the convict was visited by some of his relations – one of his sisters, his only brother, and an uncle and a niece – who were admitted along with the Rev. Richard Waterston, to pay a farewell visit previous to the execution. The scene was a most affecting one to both parties, but during their stay with the prisoner he expressed himself as quite resigned to his fate.

Brown spent much of the day before his execution, Tuesday, 30^th, in writing various papers, an activity to which he was clearly unaccustomed. These included a lengthy epistle to his mother and a brief account of his life, which he handed over to Mr Stuart, who reserved it for the time being at least, not believing that it was intended for publication; the papers also included the following statement, written carefully on a half-sheet of ruled foolscap:

Forfar Prison, January the 30, 1866. Before I leave this world I desire to acknowledge the Justice of my sentence. As God hath said, Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed. I am looking for mercy from God through the blood of Christ alone. I ask the forgiveness of my Captain’s friends for the great loss and sorrow I have caused them. I never meant to say that I did it Because I had a grudge at him Although I was tempted to say it. (Here several words have been completely obliterated.) It came into my head all at once, like the shot of a gun, but it was no sooner done than I would have given all the world to have gotten him to live again, and I have sinserely grieved for him every since. I wish to die in peace with all men. What I may have said about my shipmates at any time I ask their forgiveness, as I hope for pardon my self. I want to thank everybody for their kindness to me, Espically the Governor of this prisn And to Mr. Stewart (sic) the chaplin for the trouble He has taken for my Souls Wellfare. I finish with the earnestness of my heart that this death of mine, Will be a warning to all, And Espically to seamen, To avoid drink and bad Company and to think more of Another world. ANDREW BROWN.

Brown’s statement is quoted as written in his own hand. The spelling, punctuation, grammar and logic represent further transgressions for which he alone is accountable.

The condemned man left Forfar Prison in the early hours of the following morning, Wednesday, 31^st January 1866; The Scotsman article records the manner of his removal to Montrose:

He was then taken in a cab to the Railway Station, where the special train was waiting, and at once placed in the central compartment of a first-class carriage, into which he was accompanied by Chief-Constable Keith, Superintendent Adamson, Inspector Forbes, Mr Wilson, Governor of Forfar Prison; and Rev. Mr Stuart, Oathlaw, chaplain of the prison, who had been constant in his attendance upon him during Tuesday, and up to the time of his leaving the prison. Mr F. L. Maitland Heriot, Sheriff of the county ; and the Rev. D. Waterston, minister of the Free Church at Forfar, occupied another compartment of the same carriage. The other passenger carriage in the train, a third-class, was partly occupied by a number of county police-constables. The train left Forfar shortly after four o’clock, and reached Montrose a few minutes after five. During the journey Mr Stuart at intervals expounded to the prisoner texts of Scripture bearing on his situation ; but Brown himself spoke extremely little, and any answers which he gave to questions put to him were very curt.

Upon arrival in Montrose, the prisoner, handcuffed, was conveyed to the Police Office in a cab, accompanied always by the Rev. Harry Stuart, who remained with him, excepting for a few short intervals, until his death. In the want of any proper cell, the prisoner was confined in the room usually occupied by the burgh superintendent of police, where he continued to receive the last attentions of the ministers of religion. The scaffold, meanwhile, had been brought in from Aberdeen, having been loaned by the authorities there for what was an unusual occasion locally.

One of Mr Stuart’s temporary absences, its effect upon the prisoner, and his return are described by The Scotsman thus:

About eleven o’clock, in the temporary absence of Mr Stuart, the prisoner took ill, complaining of pain in his stomach, and a glass of brandy was given him, which appeared to have the effect of reviving him. Provost Mitchell then engaged in prayer on the prisoner’s behalf, and afterwards briefly addressed him. In the course of the Provost’s remarks, reference having been made to the sorrow under which the prisoner’s family, and particularly his mother, had been stricken down, Brown became deeply affected. Mr Stuart, who had entered during this interview, then spoke to the prisoner in an encouraging way, and he soon after recovered his composure. He then elicited from him the profession that he was resigned and anxious to die, and that his only desire was to leave the world at peace with all men.

The Liverpool Mercury account continues:

At Montrose he was handed over to the custody of the magistrates, and confined in a police cell to await the hour appointed for the execution. In the meantime a gibbet had been erected within a space barricaded off, in a part of the town where five narrow streets converge. A guard was formed, consisting of the burgh police, detachments of county constabulary, and 150 special constables sworn in for the occasion. Calcraft was the executioner. Many of the respectable inhabitants left the town for the day.

Shortly before two, Calcraft entered the room in which the prisoner was confined; Brown was pinioned, a procedure which was unhappily intruded upon by an overzealous local reporter. The Scotsman article graphically describes the scene:

The prisoner underwent the trying ceremony with firmness ; and immediately on its termination, the hour of two having now begun to toll, the melancholy procession, which was to accompany him to the scaffold, issued from the main door of the police buildings in the order following :- Two sergeants of police, the prisoner, and the executioner, Rev. Harry Stuart and Rev. D. Waterston, Sheriff Heriot, Provost Mitchell, Baillies Smith, Cook, and Davidson ; Mr Myres, town-clerk ; and Mr Brownlee, superintendent of police. Sheriff Heriot accompanied the Magistrates to the scaffold, at their particular request. The Magistrates having taken up a position in the back part of the scaffold, the executioner led the prisoner forward to the drop, guarded on each side by a sergeant of police, amid breathless stillness on the part of the crowd. The prisoner, uncovered, and in the position where he was placed, was distinctly seen by the crowds which now hemmed in the palisade surrounding the scaffold on every side.

The same source also preserves the particulars of the climactic act in this sorry drama, taking place in heavy rain at around ten minutes past two in the afternoon, including the Rev. Harry Stuart’s conspicuous part in it:

The Rev. Mr Stuart having offered up a prayer in a voice, which must have been well heard by most of those present, the executioner drew the white cap over the prisoner’s head and face, covering his neck. As the cap was going over his face the prisoner said in a firm voice, “Farewell, friends all ;” and afterwards added, speaking from under the cap, “The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin ; the Lord Jesus receive my spirit” – the subject of some remarks which had been addressed to him a few hours before by Mr Stuart. A moment or two after the cap was drawn over the prisoner’s face, and while Calcraft was engaged in adjusting the rope on the gibbet, a woman in the immediate front of the scaffold uttered a loud whimpering wail, sustained for nearly a minute, which, heard distinctly over all the crowd, and at first supposed to proceed from the prisoner, thrilled every heart with horror. Provost Mitchell reassured the crowd by a sign – Calcraft meanwhile proceeding to adjust the rope round the prisoner’s neck – and he, though maintaining a firm deportment, changing his position at the words or pressure of the executioner with the docility of a child, his lips moving as if in prayer. The preparations having been completed, Calcraft drew the bolt, and the prisoner fell a drop of from eighteen inches to two feet. As the weight of the falling body jerked on the rope, it swung slowly around, revealing with horrible distinctness the quivering features of the dying man through the thin white cotton cloth. The victim struggled convulsively, dying hard, and must have been suspended for three minutes before death ended his sufferings.

In 1871, Oathlaw Manse had twelve rooms; the reasons for the rise from the previous nine are not apparent. The Rev. Harry Stuart was, as previously, ‘Minister of Estab^d Kirk’ and had a glebe of ten acres, employing two. George, ‘Parochial Teacher of Oathlaw’, was 60. Elizabeth Kydd, housekeeper as previously, was 58 and entered on this occasion as married. The fourth member of the household was Elizabeth Malcolm, unmarried, 16, a domestic servant, born in Marykirk, Kincardineshire.

The long-suffering Rev. Harry Stuart yet sought to relinquish his role as prison chaplain. As incapable of liberating himself from the clutches of the Forfarshire Prisons’ Board as the inmates he ministered to, his sole fault was that he had made himself indispensable. As reported by the Dundee Courier & Argus, 14^th April 1873:

THE CHAPLAINCY OF FORFAR PRISON. A letter was read from Rev. Harry Stuart, resigning as chaplain of the Forfar prison. The minutes of the Forfar Committee were read in connection with this matter. They recommended that Mr Stuart should be appointed honorary chaplain, and that Rev. Mr Weir should be assistant. Mr THORNTON said that it was not within the power of the board to appoint either an honorary chaplain or assistant. It was resolved to refuse to accept of Mr Stuart’s resignation, and to allow him to take such assistance as he may deem necessary.

The Rev. Harry Stuart was elected vice-president at an Annual General Meeting on Thursday, 27^th September 1877 (Dundee Courier & Argus, 1^st October 1877; a similar report appeared in the Dundee Evening Telegraph, 29^th September 1877):

FORFAR INFIRMARY. The annual general meeting of the Directors and subscribers was held in the Town Hall on Thursday – Mr William G. Don presiding. The Directors’ report for the past year was approved of. Mr Don was elected President, and the Rev. Harry Stuart Vice-President for the ensuing year.

The Rev. Harry Stuart’s grave, Oathlaw

Photograph by Ivan Laird, 2019

The Rev. Harry Stuart of Oathlaw received a posthumous mention in the Brechin Advertiser, 26^th November 1940, in connection with certain beautifully embossed gilded leather hangings from the dining room of the old Castle of Finavon, which were stated to have passed into his possession.

Testamentary Writings

Deed and Settlement, 1877

The Reverend Harry Stuart’s testamentary writings consist of a Deed of Settlement dated 17^th September 1877, as amended by a codicil thereto, dated 28^th February 1880, recorded together at Wills and testaments Reference SC47/40/46, Forfar Sheriff Court, pp. 599 - 605.

Inventory

The following entry appears in Confirmations & Inventories, 1880, at p. 686:

Stuart, Rev. Harry Value of Estate, £6,008 7s. 2d.

7 April. – Confirmation of Rev. Harry Stuart, Minister, Parish of Oathlaw, Forfarshire, who died 18 March 1880, at The Manse of Oathlaw, testate, granted at Forfar, to William Neish of Tannadice, George Lyon, Agent, Commercial Bank, Forfar, George Stuart, his brother, and Alexander Cochran and George Anderson Advocates, Aberdeen, Executors nominated in Will or Deed, dated 17 September 1877, and recorded with another Writ in Court Books of Commissariot of Forfar, 31 March 1880.

Much of this total of £6008 7/2d was tied up in sums due from various parties and in a series of investments. It is also apparent that at least a significant part of the foundation for this evident prosperity had been laid by the active and productive use which the testator had made of his glebe. The resulting assets are tabulated as follows:

1. Cash in the House	£18
2. Household Furniture Farm Stocking and other effects belonging to deceased conform to Inventory and Valuation thereof under the hand of D. M. Graham Licensed Auctioneer Forfar	184  2 10
3. Principal sum due to the deceased by John Ogilvy of (Snhaven - is this an abbreviation for ‘Stonehaven’?) conform to Bond & Disposition in Security by him in favor of deceased dated 8th May 1863 £2000 Interest thereon to date of Oath to Inventory       30 18  -	2030 18  -
4. Principal sum due to the deceased by the Dundee Water Commissioners conform to Mortgage No 88 by said Commissioners in deceased’s favour dated 28th April 1875 £2000 Interest thereon to date of Oath to Inventory       30 18  -	2030 18  -
5. Principal sum due to deceased by the Trustees of the Harbour of Dundee conform to Bond or Assignation in Security in favor of deceased dated 5 June 1877 500 Interest thereon to date of Oath to Inventory     7 14  6	507 14  6
6. Principal sum due to deceased by said Trustees of said Harbour of Dundee conform to Deed or As- signation in Security 10163 by said Trustees in favor of deceased dated 3rd June 1878 500 Interest thereon to date of Oath to Inventory     7 14  6	507 14  6
7. Balance due to the deceased by the Commercial Bank of Scotland on Account Current Kept by Deceased with said Bank at Forfar £235 17  1 Interest thereon to date of Oath to Inventory       1   1  4	236 18  5
8. Half years money stipend due to the deceased for last half of Crop 1879 viz By Colonel Greenhill Gardyne of Finavon £45 16  9 Her Majesty’s Exchequer   13   7  6	59  4  3
9. Year Stipend for Crop 1879 due by Colonel Gardyne of Wolflaw £8  6 Do due by Captain Gray of Carsegray  3   3  7 Do due by Colonel J. G. Kinloch of Bankhead  4 17  6 Do due by Miss S. G. Lyell of Kinnordy 13  -   4 Do due by George Duke of Newbarns 12  1  6	41  8 11
England 10. £245 North Eastern Consols at the price of £159¾ per cent at date of Oath to Inventory	391  7  9
	£6008  7  2

Trustees & Executors

Alexander Cochran, Advocate in Aberdeen, one of the five ‘Trustees and Executors’ nominated by the deceased, compeared in the presence of John Laird Junior Esquire, One of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for the County of Forfar, on 31^st March 1880, and also, on the same date, in the presence of Alexander Robertson, Esquire, Sheriff Substitute of the County of Forfar, gave in the Inventory & Oath and Deed of Settlement and Codicil to be recorded in the Register of Inventories kept at Forfar for the Commissariot of Forfar.

The others were:

William Neish, Esquire of Tannadice, George Lyon, Agent for the Commercial Bank in Forfar, George Stuart Brother of the said deceased and George Anderson, Advocate in Aberdeen

Beneficiaries

The Deed of Settlement contained the usual generic direction by the testator to his executors to pay ‘my deathbed and funeral expenses and whole just and lawful debts’ out of estate funds, before proceeding to create a number of specific legacies, firstly making provision for the testator’s brother, George:

I direct my said Trustees and Executors to pay to the said George Stuart, my brother, an annuity of Forty Pounds Sterling per annum, and that during all the days of his life after my death, said annuity to be payable to him half yearly at the terms of Whitsunday & Martinmas for the half year following said terms respectively, and the first payment of Annuity, payable as aforesaid at the first term of Whitsunday or Martinmas happening after my death, to include the proportion of said Annuity for the period between the date of my death & said term, and reclaim being competent to my said Trustees and Executors against the Representatives or Estate of the said George Stuart for any portion of said annuity previously paid to him, in the event of his death occurring between any terms of Whitsunday and Martinmas.

(Whitsunday falls on 15^th May and Martinmas on 11^th November.)

Harry also appointed George his residuary beneficiary. It has to be questioned, however, to what extent, if any, George materially benefitted from the generous provision made for him under the terms of Harry’s will, considering that he only survived his elder brother by a week short of three months.

On George’s death, which, in the event, occurred on 12^th June 1880, the trustees were directed to satisfy a whole new set of provisions; in terms of which, the sum of £1,000 Sterling fell to be divided equally among the lawful children, not specifically enumerated, of Harry’s deceased brother, Robert Stuart, with the share which would have fallen to any of Robert’s children predeceasing George to be subdivided equally among his or her lawful issue. In addition to which, a legacy of £25 Sterling was payable to each of Robert’s children at the first term of Whitsunday or Martinmas following the testator’s death.

‘To James Brown, Robert Brown, Peter Brown and Ann Brown or McCombie, all Children of my deceased Sister Helen Stuart or Brown’ was left a legacy of £500 Sterling each.

Specific provision was made for two of Helen Stuart or Brown’s other daughters, Helen and Charlotte.

The trustees were directed to lay out Helen Brown’s £500 for the purchase of an annuity from an Insurance Company, the proceeds to be paid to her yearly or half-yearly.

The provisions in favour of Charlotte Brown, her husband John McPetrie, their children and even, potentially, their grandchildren, were somewhat more complex:

And I further direct my said Trustees and Executors to set apart the sum of Five hundred Pounds Sterling and to pay the interest thereof yearly or half yearly to my Niece Charlotte Brown or McPetrie & that during all the days of her life after my death, and on her death to pay said interest to her husband should he survive and on the death of the survivor of her and her said husband, I direct my said Trustees & Executors to realise said sum of Five hundred Pounds and to pay the same equally among the whole lawful Children of her the said Charlotte Brown or McPetrie and the survivors or survivor of them the lawful issue of any such child predeceasing the said Charlotte Brown or McPetrie to receive equally among them his or her parent’s share.

Due recognition was given to the long years of faithful service devoted to Harry and George by ‘Elizabeth Kydd my Housekeeper’; Elizabeth had appeared in this capacity in every census return since 1841 and even acted as informant on George’s death certificate. In her favour, there was ‘a Legacy of One Hundred and fifty Pounds Sterling or if she prefer it, an annuity of Ten pounds Sterling a year, and all her room’s furniture’.

In addition to the various bequests in favour of his relations and housekeeper, the Rev. Harry Stuart also provided for an academic endowment:

Moreover I direct my said Trustees and Executors, as soon as convenient after my death, to transfer and convey, Two and one half original One Hundred Pounds shares Consolidated Stock of the North Eastern Railway Company originally the York and North Midland belonging to me, to William Hunter, Advocate in Aberdeen as Factor for the University of Aberdeen and his successors in Office as Factors foresaid, and I direct the said William Hunter & his foresaids to apply the annual revenue to be derived from said shares in two prizes to be given annually to the two best Students in the Second Hebrew Class in said University said prizes to be of such an amount and payable to such Students in said Class as the Theological Faculty in said University shall see fit and that for the purpose of promoting a common knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures, the said William Hunter and his foresaids being always bound if called upon by said Faculty to sell said shares & invest the proceeds on such security heritable or moveable as said Faculty may direct, the revenue of said proceeds being always applied in all time coming in manner before directed

The Stuart Prize in Hebrew, thus instituted by the Rev. Harry Stuart, was referred to in the Aberdeen Daily Journal, 1^st November 1911:

ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY. DEGREES AND PRIZES. The Stuart prize in Hebrew was awarded to Mr James Smith, divinity student. The Stewart (sic) prizes, of the value of £10 and £5 respectively, were founded in 1880 by the Rev. Harry Stuart, (M.A., Marischal College, 1820) Oathlaw. They are awarded by competition by the same papers as the autumn examination for Hebrew for the B.D. degree, and are open for competition to students who have attended the senior Hebrew class during the preceding winter session. The prize last year was won by David A. Anderson, M.A.

One incidental legacy, in favour of the Kirk Session of the Parish of Oathlaw, was the ‘Scholl Jug’ which had been presented to the testator by the Prison Board of Forfarshire and which, one readily imagines, had been for some time a regular feature of Kirk Session meetings.

To each of his accepting and acting Trustees and Executors, a legacy of £5 Sterling was bequeathed, this apparently extending to Alexander Cochran and George Anderson, Advocates in Aberdeen, notwithstanding their appointment as Trustees and Executors and without prejudice to their entitlement to charge ordinary remuneration for their professional services.

All provisions in favour of female beneficiaries were asserted to be ‘exclusive of the jus mariti & right of administration of any husband or husbands they may at present be married to or may hereafter marry’ and that payment could competently be made to them on their own receipt alone.

The Trustees and Executors were granted a broad discretion in continuing such of the Rev. Harry’s investments as might still be held by him at the time of his death, with the alternative of converting them into liquid assets by public roup (auction) or private bargain.

Codicil, 1880

A codicil, dated 28^th February 1880 and witnessed by Robert Bruce, accountant in the Commercial Bank, Forfar, and the Rev. Robert Robertson, assistant to the Rev. Harry Stuart, altered the Deed of Settlement to the extent of creating an additional bequest in favour of the testator’s brother, George:

I hereby bequeath the whole proceeds of every description belonging to me that may be in the Manse of Oathlaw at the time of my death and also my farm Stocking and Crops and property of every description that may be on the Glebe of Oathlaw at said time, to my brother George Stuart as a special legacy in his favour.