John Leslie, Twenty-second Baron of Balquhain

http://books.google.com/books?id=lyENAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA192#v=onepage&q=...

Page 192 - 230

"John Leslie,

"Twenty-Second Baron of Balquhain.

"John Leslie, born 13th January 1751, third surviving son of Patrick Leslie Duguid, twenty-first Baron of Balquhain, by Amelie Irvine of Kingcaussey, his second wife, succeeded as twenty-second Baron of Balquhain on the death of his father in April 1777; his two elder brothers, James and Charles, being excluded from the succession by a clause in the deeds of entail excluding heirs who were in the holy orders.

"Scotland being at the time in a very unsettled state, in consequence of the troubles of 1745, and there being then no schools for the education of young people professing the Catholic religion, John Leslie was sent abroad at an early age, about 1761, to be educated at the Scotch college at Ratisbon, where the Counts Leslie in Germany had made a foundation for the education of members of the family. John Leslie prosecuted his studies with great success, and became an elegant classical scholar and an excellent linguist, speaking most of the modern languages with fluency.

"During the time John Leslie was at Ratisbon, Peter Leslie Grant, then in possession of the estate of Balquhain, fell into delicate health, and there appeared to be no probability that he would marry. Patrick Leslie Duguid and his family, therefore, became anxious that John Leslie should return to Scotland, which he was induced to do at their urgent request, as appears by a letter from his eldest brother, the Rev. James Leslie, written 17th March 1770. John Leslie returned home with some reluctance, because he had made up his mind to enter the Austrian service. It was desirable that he should relinquish this plan, as in the event of the death of Peter Leslie Grant without issue, he became immediate heir-apparent of entail to the estate of Balquhain, his elder brothers being excluded from the succession, being in holy orders.

"On his return home, in order to improve himself and to obtain a knowledge of the laws of the country, and so to qualify himself to understand the duties of a country gentleman, John Leslie studied civil and canon law at the University of Edinburgh, and attended various other classes there. By these studies, combined with the accomplishments acquired in foreign lands, he became a most finished gentleman, and, being of a lively dispostion, a most agreeable companion. During this period he used frequently to pay visits to his cousin, Peter Leslie Grant, at Fetternear.

"Peter Leslie Grant, twentieth Baron of Balquhain, died in 1775, and was succeeded by Patrick Leslie Duguid of Auchinhove as twenty-first Baron of Balquhain. Finding himself unable from his years to manage the estates and the lawsuits in which he found himself involved, as has been narrated, he resigned his estates in favour of his son John, in 1776. Patrick Leslie Duguid did not long survive his resignation: died in the following April, 1777.

"As has been narrated, Peter Leslie Grant, having been in difficulties with regard to money, granted a lease of the whole estate of Balquhain to David Orme, writer in Edinburgh, for a period of five times nineteen years, from Whitsunday 1769 to Whitsunday 1864, being a duration of ninety-five years, at the rent of £733 : 13 : 4 a-year. On the death of Peter Leslie Grant in 1775, his successor, Patrick Leslie Duguid, brought an action of reduction against David Orme, to reduce this long lease; but during his lifetime little progress was made in the action. When John Leslie succeeded his father in the estates, he continued the process for the reduction of the lease. In the meantime, he was put to the greatest inconvenience, as David Orme had taken possession of the mansion-house of Fetternear, as appears by a letter written by John Leslie to his wife, dated 28th April 1776. In consequence of this, John Leslie was obliged to remain at Terregles with his father-in-law for upwards of a year, and his first child, Ernest, was born there. After that he took up his residence at Kingswells in 1777, a place belonging to his law-agent Mr. Durno, several miles from Fetternear, on the Skene road to Aberdeen. Afterwards he went to live at Tullos, a small and inconvenient house on the estate of Balquhain. During this period he was subjected to every sort of annoyance and persecution on account of his religion. Few of the country people would afford his family even the smallest assistance or service for any money; they would hardly sell them an egg or a chicken. There were some honourable exceptions – people who were attached to the cause of the Stuarts, and who had been out with Mr. Leslie’s father in 1745. These worthy people and their descendants continued faithful adherents to Mr. Leslie through life, on account of the difficulties to which the family was subjected. But they were the exception. When Mr. Leslie’s brothers, the Rev. James and the Rev. Charlies Leslie, visited him, and said mass privately in his house, the women of the neighbourhood, getting to hear of it, threatened to break the windows. Being obliged to go to Edinburgh in 1780, on law business, accompanied by his brother the Rev. James Leslie, and his sister-in-law Miss Margaret Dalzell, they happened to arrive during the anti-Catholic riots raised by Lord George Gordon, and no person would take them into a house, and they were obliged to take a small boat and cross the Frith [sic] of Forth on a dark and stormy night, and seek shelter on the opposite coast.

"To add to these difficulties, David Orme, fearful of losing the power which he had acquired over the estate of Balquhain, carried his ill-will and prejudice so far, that he used every endeavour to produce a Protestant claimant to the estate; and he attempted to setup up as such one Joseph Duguid, an illegitimate son of James Duguid, a brother of Patrick Leslie Duguid, twenty-first Baron of Balquhain.

"James Duguid was the third son of Robert Duguid, ninth Baron of Auchinhove, by his wife, Teresa Leslie. Being of a very unsettled disposition, he fell into difficulties and enlisted in the 42d Highland Regiment, in which he became a sergeant. He married a woman of the name of Brodie, who went with him when he accompanied his regiment to America. When he returned home again, his wife remained in America, and was kept by a lieuntenant in the regiment, and afterwards became a common prostitute. James Duguid then took up with another woman in his country, and cohabited with her while his own wife was still living. This woman had a son called Joseph, and James Duguid was supposed to be his father. But James Duguid, on his death-bed, solemly declared that he never was married to Joseph’s mother. The said Joseph was at best an adulterous bastard. But this did not prevent Mr. Orme from bringing him forward as a Protestant heir to the estate of Balquhain.

"Mr. Orme founded Joseph Duguid’s claim to the estate of Balquhain on the seventy-first act of the sixth parliament of King James VI., entitled ‘An Act anent the youth and others beyond sea suspected to have declined from the true religion’, and the third act of the 8th and 9th sessions of the first parliament of William III., dated 3d November 1700, entitled ‘An Act for preventing the growth of popery’; by which acts persons professing the popish religion, and neglecting to purge themselves of popery by taking the formula prescribed by law, or who sent their children, or had themselves been sent abroad to be educated in popish religious houses, were excluded from any right which they might have to succeed to any real estate in Scotland, and the nearest Protestant heir was entitled to succeed to such estate, in the same manner as if the nearer Catholic heirs were dead.

"Joseph Duguid founded his claim on these acts of parliament, and brought an action of reduction against Patrick Leslie Duguid, late of Auchinhove, now designed of Balquhain; James Duguid, his eldest son; Charles Duguid, his second son; John Duguid, his third son; Patrick Duguid, his fourth son, and Alexander Duguid, his brother-german; and sought to have it found and declared that all these were persons professing the popish religion, or had been educated in popish religious houses abroad, and as such incapable to succeed to, or to take, hold, enjoy, or possess, the lands and estate of Balquhain, but were obliged to resign the same in favour of him, Joseph Duguid, the next protestant heir of entail.

"Foreseeing that the legitimacy of Joseph Duguid would be disputed, David Orme brought an action of declarator of his legitimacy before the Commissary of Edinburgh. Appearance was made for John Leslie of Balquhain, who offered to prove that the said Joseph Duguid was an adulterous bastard, the reputed son of James Duguid, born to him during the lifetime of his wife, from whom he was separated. This offer put an end to this process. David Orme then bethought him of the device of serving Joseph Duguid as heir-in-general to Jame Duguid, his supposed father, before the bailies of the Canongate, without attempting to serve him as Protestant heir-in-special to Peter Leslie Grant; finding it impossible to accomplish the latter on account of Joseph’s bastardy and the existence of nearer heirs of entail.

"On the part of Joseph Duguid, David Orme further raised objections to the service and retour of John Leslie of Balquhain, on the ground that John Lelsie had two elder brothers, who, although in holy orders, were not excluded from the succession by the clause of the deed of entail, because the clause did not exclude such heirs as were in holy orders at the time the succession opened to them, but only such as should receive holy orders after the succession opened to them; also on the ground that John Leslie was a papist, and as such his service to the estate of Balquhain ought not to proceed.

"On the report of Lord Kames, one of the assessors in the competition of breves between John Leslie and Joseph Dubuid, the Lords of Session found that the service of John Leslie could not proceed, and that the service of Joseph Duguid might proceed; and they remitted to the macers to proceed in the service of Joseph Duguid accordingly.

"By this judgement matters were brought to an extremity; and there being no appeal against the unjust law of which David Orme had taken advantage, John Leslie thought it prudent to get a Protestant friend of the family to take charge of his infant son and heir, Ernest, was born while the process was pending, and who would be considered by law as a nearer Protestant heir to the estates while under the guardianship of a Protestant, than Joseph Duguid. Accordingly, James Irvine of Kingcaussey, John Leslie’s maternal uncle, applied by petition to the Court of Session that it might be ordained that Ernest Patrick Leslie, the son of John Leslie of Balquhain, now an infant, should remain under the keeping of James Irvine of Kingcaussey, to the end that he might be educated suitably to his station, and especially that he might instructed in the principles of the Protestant religion by law established, and that he might remain under his charge till further orders of the court, and that such a sum might be appointed in name of aliment, to be paid to James Irvine out the means of John Leslie, the father, to defray the expense of the education and maintenance of the said Ernest Patrick Leslie; and this in virtue of an act of parlament passed in 1661, entitled ‘An Act against popish priests and Jesuits’, which, after discharging them from saying mass within the kingdom, commands all sheriffs and magistrates to send to parliament or to the Privy Council lists of such persons as are known or suspected to be papists, that course might be taken with them conform to the laws, enacts as follows:-- ‘Likewise his Majesty, considering how dangerous it is that children be educated by persons popishly affected, do therefore, in conformity to former acts of parliament, appoint that children under popish parents or curators, shall be taken from them and committed to the education of some well-affected and religious Protestant friend, by order of his Majesty’s Privy Council’. The Court of Session granted to James Irvine the prayer of his petition, and he got possession of the infant, Ernest Leslie. The child was seized with an alarming illness, of which he nearly died, and his parents got permission to visit him. Mrs. Leslie risked her life in visiting her sick child. It was in November, and the snow fell so fast and heavily tht the carriage could not proceed, and Mrs. Leslie with her infant daughter, whom she was then nursing, had to get out and wade through the snow. It was only when John Leslie, compelled by the necessity of the case, submitted to a degrading form of law, that his infant son was restored to him.

"John Leslie, having the prospect before him of being deprived of his estate, and seeing his son taken from him to be educated in a religion different from that which he and his ancestors had professed for so many centuries, had been frequently urged by his legal advisers and Protestant friends to take the formula, by which means, nominally renouncing his religion, he might have his son restored to him, and his estate secured. John Leslie was very reluctant to do this, and for a long time he refused. His uncle, James Irvine of Kingcaussey, wrote to him the following well-meant letters, urging him to comply with the requirements of the law.

“ ‘ Edinburgh, 25th November 1777.

" 'Dear Nephew – We got safe here Friday last, but too late to meet with the Lord Advocate. Yesterday I had a long conversation with Mr. Colquhoun Grant upon your affairs. It seems there is a necessity for taking the formula within the Presbytery of Garioch. Here it cannot be done, and all your lawyers are of opinion if that is not done little Pat must be served heir, and the widow also for her terce. This you must know will be destruction and beggary, and the child taken away from you for ever. I have at a distance talked with two of our judges, and I assure you they said just what Mr. Grant will tell you by this post. You have an army of the best lawyers against you, and it really gives me great concern to think of the consequences if you do not do what you should do. I say no more, but compliments to Mrs. Lesly and Miss Dalzell, and that I am always, dear nephew, yours, &c.

“ ‘ James Irvine

“ ‘ To John Leslie, Esq., of Balquhain

“ ‘ At Mr. Durno’s, Aberdeen

“ ‘ Edinburgh, 6th December 1777.

" 'Dear Nephew – Altho’ I have had no answer to my last, yet as your affairs are now in that situation that a few days more must, if you still persist in not doing what you ought, you and all your family ever live in beggary and want, and I am sure with good reason heartily curse you, and lament you ever were born. If you had not married, I should not have felt what I now do, and from hence-forward shall not trouble you upon this subject. Do not flatter yourself with idle nonsense of a division of the House of Peers. That will not do, and Mr. Grant is determined to serve your son heir, and Mrs. Leslie in her terce, and by this post Mr. Durno will have orders for doing so, and indeed you have not a friend that can condemn him. How soon this service is over, little Pat shall be sent for, and neither his mother, nor you, nor any of his Roman Catholic friends, must have anything more to say to him. Mr. Grant will write to you this day, and altho’ I expect no answer to this, yet I can answer to myself that I have done everything in my power to save you and your family from utter ruin; and with compliments to Mrs. Lesly and Miss Dalzell, I am, your aff. Uncle and humble servt.,

“ ‘ James Irvine

"John Leslie was deeply moved by the opinion which his Protestant friends expressed with regard to his conscientious scruples against taking the formula, and at last, after much reluctance, and with great repugnance, he took before the Presbytery of Aberdeen. But David Orme persisted in his plan of oppostion, and brough an action in the Court of Session to reduce the proceedings of the Presbytery of Aberdeen, alleging that John Leslie did not then live within the bounds of that presbytery, and that he had only signed the formula without repeating the words. To put an end to these objections, John Leslie was obliged to take the formula again before the Presbytery of the Garioch.

"He was then required to prove that his two elder brothers, James and Charles, were in holy orders, and thereby excluded from succession to the estate by an express clause in the deeds of entail. This he proved, and the Court of Session pronounced a declarator against the said James and Charles Leslie as papists, and priests of the Romish Church, 21st January 1778. John Leslie was then served and retoured heir to his father, Patrick Leslie Duguid, in the lands and barony of Balquhain, 26th January 1778; and a precept of Chancery for infefting him in the said barony was issued to the sheriff and bailies of Aberdeen, 31st January 1778.

"Thus were the claims of Joseph Duguid disposed of. It was not possible that it could long be the law of the land that such a claimant could bring an action to eject lawful proprietors from their estates on account of their religion. In the very following year, 1779, an act of parliament was passed allowing Roman Catholics in Great Britain and Ireland to educate their own children without incurring the punishment of perpetual imprisonment; and Catholics were declared capable of acquiring landed property by purchase or inheritance, and of transmitting it to others. England and Ireland acquiesced in this small measure of favour granted to fellow-Christians. But in Scotland the intolerant spirit of presbytery stopped the current of brotherly love, and stirred up a spirit of hatred which terminated in the riots of 1780, when Lord Mansfield’s house in London was sacked and burned by a mob led by the fanatic Scotchman Lord George Gordon; and the Catholic church and Bishop Hay’s house in Edinburgh were destroyed, and the house of Principal Robertson was attached by a furious populace, who were restrained only by military force from sacrificing the Principal’s life to their vengeance, because he had said in the General Assembly that these slender concessions ought to be made to Catholics.

"Years had now passed, and the law-plea which was to decide the validity of the lease granted by Peter Leslie Grant to David Orme was still pending. The deeds on which David Orme defended his claim were the following:--

" I. A Lease of the whole estate of Balquhain, granted to him by Peter Leslie Grant in 1765 for nineteen years.

" II. A Lease of the whole estate of Balquhain, granted to him by Peter Leslie Grant for four times nineteen years, from Whitsunday 1769, for a rent of £733 : 13 : 4.

" III. An Assignation, dated 29th March 1769, to him by Peter Leslie Grant of the said rent of £733 : 13 : 4, with the exception of a sum of £300 a-year to be paid to Peter Leslie Grant – the balance of rent being assigned to pay his debts.

" IV. A Ratification of the above three deeds, dated 14th September 1769, by Patrick Leslie Duguid, the next heir of entail

" V. A Lease, dated 7th September 1773, to him by Peter Leslie Grant of the Manor and House of Fetternear, for four times nineteen years from Whitsunday 1773.

" VI. A Lease, dated 11th Septermber 1773, to him by Peter Leslie Grant of the whole estate and premises contained in the former leases, for nineteen years, to commence at the termination of the second lease, viz. at Whitsunday 1845.

"David Orme's views at first seem to have extended no further than to get every possible security for the repayment of the money due to him by Peter Leslie Grant. But afterwards he came to entertain ideas of a very different kind. He availed himself of Peter Leslie Grant’s necessities, and of the confidence which he reposed in him, and aimed at getting possessin of the estate of Balquhain under the form of a lease for a number of years amounting nearly to a perpetuity, coupled with such other deeds as would render his possession absolute. Indeed, Peter Leslie Grant, in spite of his inexperience and want of reflection, and the unlimited confidence which he placed in David Orme, became sensible of the unfair advantage which had been taken of him, as appears by a letter written, 8th February 1773, to John Leslie, declaiming in the most bitter terms against the whole tranactions as piece of gross imposition put on him under the mask of friendship. But his turn for dissipation was continually leading him into fresh extravagance, and his debts went on accumulating so as to render any redress impossible.

"In the law proceedings it came out that the lease for four times nineteen years, from Whitsunday 1769, was sent to Peter Leslie Grant, then in Edinburgh, on the 28th March 1769, with a note in David Orme’s handwriting, informing him that he might keep the lease till next day, but must bring it with him to dinner at a tavern named. On Peter Leslie Grant’s part no friend or lawyer had been consulted, and being permitted only one day for reflection, he had not time to give sufficient consideration to so important a matter. He went to the tavern next day, 29th March 1769, and there signed the lease without further inquiry. In order to secure this lease, David Orme applied to Patrick Leslie Duguid, the next heir of entail, to get a ratification of it, so that it might not be reduced on his succession. David Orme invited Patrick Leslie Duguid to dine at Fetternear, and after dinner he produced a ratification of the lease, and by artifice he induced him to sign it, 14th September 1769.

"David Orme, in his defence, stated that the execution of the lease and deed of assignation and restriction was witnessed by one of the judges of the Court of Session; that the whole transaction was known to Patrick Leslie Duguid, the then next heir of entail, who resided on the estate and who, 14th September 1769, executed a deed mentioning the obligations which all the heirs of entail lay under to him, David Orme; that the lease for four times nineteen years which Peter Leslie Grant had given him, and the deed of assignation and restriction, were just and equitable; that it was reasonable that he and Peter Leslie Grant’s other creditors should have every sercurity which it was in the power of the heir of entail to possession to grant; that having taken opinion of counsel how far Peter Leslie Grant, then an infant, the nearest Protestant heir called to succeed to the estate of Balquhain, and who was a native of Great Britain, could exclude the other heirs named before him in the entail, in respect of their being papists and aliens, and having been advised that his claims were well founded, he, David Orme, who was Peter Leslie Grant’s first cousin, brought him over from Holland, where he resided with his father; that he maintained and educated him, and, in 1756, when he was fifteen years of age, he raised an action in his name for the recovery of the estate of Balquhain from the Counts Leslie; that he had involved himself in great expense to prove that the Counts Leslie were Roman Catholics and aliens; that a great part of the evidence to prove these points being taken by commission in foreign parts, particularly at Vienna, whither [sic] it was necessary to bring witnesses from Gratz in Styria, where the Counts Leslie resided; that he had himself to go abroad several times in the cause; that he gave up his whole time and business to it, and staked all that he had, and all the credit that he could command, on it; that the action aginst the Counts Leslie commenced in 1756, and they, being people of great opulence and power, contested every point; that no less than thirty-six interlocutors were pronounced in the cause by the Court of Session, and five appeals carried to the House of Lords; that the cause was continued for more than six years, when it was decided in favour of Peter Leslie Grant; that the expenses of the process were very great, and the whole were defrayed by him, David Orme – Peter Leslie Grant having neither money nor credit of his own, except £343 lent to him by Sir Ludowic Grant, and £150 lent to him by his relations, which he, David Orme, paid; that Peter Leslie Grant, sensible of the service which he had rendered to him, settled an account on his coming of age, 15th April 1762, for the money expended by him in the lawsuit since 1756, with an allowance for his trouble and advances, and granted a bond for £3080, with interest from 16th April 1762; and that he settled a second account, 26th April 1763, for further expenses incurred, and gave him a bond for the balance of £155 : 3 : 3 ; that on the 25th April 1765, with a view to pay him and others what he owed them, Peter Leslie Grant executed a deed whereby he leased the whole estate of Balquhain to him for nineteen years from Whitesunday 1765, for the rent of £300 a-year, to be paid to him, his heirs, and assigns – the surplus rent to be applied to the payment of Peter Leslie Grant’s debts, after deducting necessary charges, provided Peter Leslie Grant did not apply such surplus rent to other necessary purposes; that for four years after the date of this lease, Peter Leslie Grant found it necessary to apply the surplus rent to other purposes, and, in consequence, his debts increased; that Peter Leslie Grant, being sensible that some other plan must be adopted for the payment of his debts, took the opinion of counsel, with respect to his power under the entail to grant a long lease of the estate as a security to his creditors; that what followed was in conformity with the opinion of counsel; that John Lumsden, a tenant on the estate, and his brother, were appointed to make out a statement of the rents and of the fines or grassums which the tenants paid for their leases, and to give their opinion what grassum each farm would likely yield, supposing the lease to be out; that their report was laid before Mr Farquharson, accountant in Edinburgh, with a memorial that Peter Leslie Grant had resolved to grant a total lease of the estate of Balquhain for four times nineteen years, at the present rent, in favour of him, David Orme; and desiring him to make a calculation as to what the various farms might yield by way of grassum in present money, supposing the farms to be worth the appraised money at the commencement of each term of nineteen years, and at what rate the victual or meal rent should be taken on an average of the fiars for the preceding twenty years; that Mr. Farquharson stated in his report that, supposing the current leases to be as stated, the grassums for four time nineteen years would amount to £992 : 15 : 6 sterling; and that, in respect of the endurance of the tack, and that the last seven years had been years of scarcity all over Britain, he was of the opinion that the price of bere should not exceed £7 Scots, or 11s. 8d. sterling, per boll, and the whole meal should not exceed £5 : 14s. Scots per boll, and that at these prices he had drawn up an abstract of the whole rental, amounting to £9062 : 8 : 3 Scots; that, in consequnce of this report, the lease for nineteen years granted to him in 1756 was annulled, and, on the 29th March 1769, Peter Leslie Grant gave him a new lease, whereby, for the sum of £992 : 15 : 6 sterling premium or grassum, he let or devised to him, his heirs and assigns, the whole lands and barony of Balquhain for the term of four times nineteen years; and he, David Orme, became bound to pay to Peter Leslie Grant, his heirs and assigns, the yearly rent of £9062 : 8 : Scots, or £733 : 13 : 4 sterling, the amount of the rental valued by Mr. Farquharson – always deducting the minister’s stipend and other public burden that the lease contained a clause to the effect that if Peter Leslie Grant, his heirs or assigns, chose to possess the house, gardens, and Mains of Fetternear, he, David Orme, should be obliged to yield them up upon twelve months’ warning, being allowed a discount from the rent; that in 1769 Peter Leslie Grant’s debts were as follows, viz. – due to him, David Orme, after deducting £992 : 15 : 6 Paid as a grassum for the lease, £2398 : 11 : 5-1/2; repaid by David Orme to Sir Ludowick Grant, principal and interest, £411, 14s. 4d.; fees of counsel, for which David Orme had given bond in trust for him, £851 : 13 : 10. Balance due to London solicitors for last apperal, £560 : 3s.; due to physicians, during a long illness, and to the surgeon in whose house Peter Leslie Grant had lived in London, £867 : 4 : 8 ; due to sundry persons, for which David Orme became security, £558 : 15 : 11 :-- in all £5648, 3s. 7-1/2d.; that to make a sinking –fund for the payment of these debts, and to provide an allowance for Peter Leslie Grant himself, and to put his affairs on a clear footing for the time to come, another deed was executed on the same day as the lease, whereby, after reciting the lease and the debts due as above, Peter Leslie Grant assigned to him, David Orme, his heirs and assigns, for himself, and in trust for the other creditors, the sum of £4770 : 1 : 9 Scots, being the yearly rent or tack-duty due for the lease, being the balance, after deducting the sum of £3600 Scots, reserved to himself and his heirs, and £692 : 1 : 9 Scots, being minister’s stipend and other public burdens; which annual sum of £4770 : 1 : 9, he, David Orme, was bound to apply – first, in payment of an annuity of £60 to Elizabeth Grant, only sister of Peter Leslie Grant, in case she should survive him, and the remainder for the extinction of the principal and interest of the debts due by Peter Leslie Grant; and to the end that the said sum should be punctually applied to the said purposes, Peter Leslie Grant discharged him, David Orme, and his heirs and assigns, as lessees, of that portion of the rent until all the said debts were extinguished; and he provided that, in the event of the heir of entail who should succeed to him refusing to ratify these deeds, by virtue of the power vested in him to set tacks for any yearly rent he might think proper, being satisfied that all the sums due to him, David Orme, and the other creditors, except the debts lately contracted, wereh spent in rem versamm of all the heirs of entail, he restricted the rent of £9062 : 8 : 3 Scots, payable by the lessee, to the sum of £300 sterling, payable to himself and the hsir on entail in possession for the time being, till the whole debt should be paid off; that under this lease, he, David Orme, entered into possession of the estate of Balquhain, and went and resided with his family on it, but found that it would be necessary either to build a dwelling-house or to repair the house of Fetternear, which was in ruin; that from the latter course he was deterred by the power reserved to Peter Leslie Grant, his heirs and assigns, to resume possession of the mansion-house of Fetternear; but that, to obviate this difficulty, Peter Leslie Grant executed another deed, dated 4th August 1769, restricting this right to himself and his heirs, exclusive of assigns, and permitting him, David Orme, to cut barren timber for building or repairing the tenants’ houses, and for restoring Fetternear House, and fencing such fields as he should take into his own possession, and obliged himself to give an allowance for such repairs as should be made in the house of Fetternear, and in the office-houses; also that he should take down such parts as could not be repaired, and use the materials for other building, and that no additional rent was to be charged for the privilege of cutting timber; and, in the event of limestone being found on the estate, he, David Orme, was to pay at the rate of a penny a boll for what he should dispose of after serving his own tenants; that, having been at considerable expense in repairing Fetternear House, he thought it would be a hardship if the succeeding heirs were to turn him out of possession of it and the surrounding enclosures; therefore he prevailed on Peter Leslie Grant to restrict the power of recovering possession of it to himself and the heirs-male of his body; and, in consderation of the extensive repairs done at Fetternear House, and for a grassum of £55, to grant to him, his heirs and assigns, a lease of the manor and house of Fetternear, with the avenues, gardens, enclosures, office-houses, and Mains, for four times nineteen years from Whitsunday 1773; and further, another lease for nineteen years, to commence on the expiry of the former lease for four times nineteen years, for a grassum of £25 sterling; that Peter Leslie Grant died in 1775, and was succeeded by Patrick Leslie Duguid, who was not in a position to assail the above leases and deeds on account of his ratification of the same, 14th September 1769.

"After a lengthened process, the Lord Ordinary, having advised the process of reduction at the instance of John Leslie of Balquhain against David Orme, and the counter-process of the said David Orme; the two deeds of entail made by Count Patrick Leslie in 1692 and 1700; the tacks and other deeds under challenge; the memorials for both parties, and the answers thereto, pronounced an interlocutor, 18th July 1788, to the following effect, viz. --

" I. With respect to the first deed -- viz. a lease of the whole estate of Balquhain granted in 1765 by Peter Leslie Grant in favour of David Orme, for nineteen years – as it was renounced, the Lord Ordinary assoilzies the defender David Orme.

" II. With respect to the second lease of the whole of Balquhain for four times nineteen years from Whitsunday 1769, granted by Peter leslie Grant in favour of David Orme, the Lord Ordinary finds that by a clause in the deeds of entail, Count Patrick Leslie permitted heirs of tailzie to grant tacks of any part of the estate, and that under the then rental if such heirs should think fit; and therefore that the tack in dispute is not liable to be challenged by the pursuer John Leslie.

" III. With respect to the deed of assignation, dated 29th March 1769, whereby Peter Leslie Grant reserved to himself the sum of £300 out of the rental, and assigned the balance for the payment of his debts, the Lord Ordinary finds that that such assignation cannot be effectual beyond the lifetime of Peter Leslie Grant and such of the other heirs of tailzie as should have ratified the same; and as it was ratified by Patrick Leslie Duguid, the pursuer’s father, he therefore assoilzies the defender from the reduction of the said deed for the period during the life of Peter Leslie Grant and of Patrick Leslie Duguid, till 1777, but reduces the same in so far as regards the assignation of the said rent from and after Patrick Leslie Duguid’s death.

" IV. With respect to the ratification of the leases above-mentioned, and the assignation of the rental payable under the same, made by Patrick Leslie Duguid, 14th September 1769, the Lord Ordinary sustains the same.

" V. With respect to the lease made by Peter Leslie Grant, 7th September 1773, in favour of David Orme, of the manor-place and house of Fetternear for four times nineteen years, and the restriction of resuming possession of the same to the said Peter Leslie Grant, and his heirs-male, excluding heirs of entail, the Lorder Ordinary finds that as Peter Leslie Grant was under no limitation for granting tacks of all or any part of the estate, and for such rent as he thought proper, therefore the pursuer cannot challenge the said lease as comprehending the manor-place and mansion-house of Fetternear, or as restricting the privilege of resuming possession of the same to the heirs-mail of Peter Leslie Grant; and further finds no evidence that Fetternear is the mansion-house of the family, or has been occupied as such for many years; therefore, as the entail makes no exceptions, he repels also that reason for reducing the said lease.

" VI. With respect to the lease, dated 11th September 1774, whereby Peter Leslie Grant not only ratified the former lease of the whole estate of Balquhain in favour of David Orme for four times nineteen years from Whitsunday 1769, but also grants a new lease of the same for another period of nineteen years, to commence at the expiry of the former lease, thus giving the lease a duration of five times nineteen years, or ninety-five years, from Whitsunday 1769 to Whitsunday 1864, the Lord Ordinary sustains the said lease, and assoilzies the defender, David Orme, from the reduction of the same.

"By this interlocutor all these ruinous leases were sustained, notwithstanding the act of parliament of 1685, which declares that it shall not be lawful for heirs of tailzie to sell, alienate, or dispose of, any part of their entailed lands, or to contract debts, or do any other deed whereby the same may be oppressed, adjudged, or evicted from the other heirs on entail. John Leslie made representations against the interlocutor, but they were rejected by the Lord Ordinary. Neither was David Orme satisfied with it, because it reduced the deed whereby the balance of the rent payable under the lease was assigned to him. Therefore both John Leslie and he appealed to the Court of Session.

"In the further proceedings, John Leslie endeavoured to show, by investigation of the transactions and deeds, that Peter Lesle Grant had suffered gross lesion, and that, in making the bargains, some of the most essential circumstances had been misrepresented or fraudulently concealed from him, which accounted to a breach of trust. At length, in 1781, the Court of Session pronounced a decision to the effect that David Orme’s lease should stand good for four times nineteen years, and the mansion-house of Fetternear, with the manor-place, should be restored to John Leslie.

"By this decision, only nineteen years were struck off the duration of the lease, and the unwarrantable dispositions made by Peter Leslie Grant, contrary to the entail, were sustained. The grounds on which the Court of Session sustained a lease of such unusual duration, contrary to the terms of entail, appear to have rested on the plea of equity. The court seems to have considered that David Orme was entitled to indemnification for the expenses incurred by him in recovering the estate of Balquhain from the Counts Leslie in Germany, and thus opening the succession to the descendents of the daughters of Count Patrick Leslie. But the decision is contrary to all decisions given by the Court of Session ever since.

"When John Leslie recovered possession of the once fine family seat and mansion-house of Fetternear, with its once magnificient domain, he found it in desolation, and reduced almost to a barren waste. The fact was, that David Orme, being aware that John Leslie was a Catholic, and knowing how unfavourable the laws were to Catholics, thought he was quite secure, and would be enabled by law to keep undisturbed possession of everything granted to him by his lease. He carried his insolence so far, that he refused John Leslie, or any member of his family, permission even to enter the house of Fetternear, althought they wished to do so only as a matter of curiosity to see it. When, therefore, he found himself likely to be ejected, with great malice he did everything possible to dilapidate and destroy the place. He ordered all the woods to be cut down even the ornamental timber and the superb old avenue of trees which lead up to the house in triple rows on either hand. Some of the neighbouring gentlemen and friends of the family, with the view of preserving the woods from destruction, and of saving them for the family, purchased them, and left them standing. But David Orme insisted that this was a breach of bargain,as the woods were sold under condition of being cut down. Therefore he repossessed himself of them, and in consequence of this, the finest trees were sold for the smallest trifle. He swept them all away, and destroyed the fine old gardens. Orchards, shrubberies, and walks were allowed to go to ruin; and then he pulled down the two side wings of the house of Fetternear, and used the beams and timbers as firewood. Since the death of Count Ernest Leslie, eighteenth Baron of Balquahin, in 1739, without issue, and the consequent disputed succession, first between Sir James Leslie of Pitcaple and Count Charles Cajetan Leslie in 1740, and the continued absence of Count Anthony Leslie in Germany, then the law-process between him and Peter Leslie Grant, and, lastly, the alienation of the property to David Orme, the estate of Balquhain had been for upwards of forty years under the control and management of lawyers and factors, who took no interest in improvements, or in keeping up the conditon of the estate.

"John Leslie, on obtaining possession of the mansion-house of Fetternear in 1781, put it into a state of repair, and set about improving the domain according to the newest and most approved mode of agriculture. He had the merit of introducing on the finest breeds of cattle ever seen at that period in the north of Scotland. They were originally of the pure Galloway breed, and by crossing with others of an approved description produced a breed which was held in great esteem by the farmers in the country. He lost no time in planting trees about the place. He planted the Cottown and Gallowhill parks, and extensive tracts of barren ground, besides ornamental plantations of the domain.

"Soon after the ending of the lawsuit in 1781, David Orme became bankrupt, and his lease of the esate of Balquhain devolved to William Keith, as trustee for the creditors. William Keith, by an assignation dated 17th July 1782, and recorded in the Register of Sasines 30th July 1786, transferred the lease to Henry Lumsden, advocate in Aberdeen, from Whitsunday 1781, and Henry Lumsden made Alexander Lumsden a partner with himself in it from Whitsundy 1789. Articles of agreement were executed between Henry and Alexander Lumsden, and assignation was made of the lease by Henry Lumsden, in favour of himself and the said Aleander Lumsden, 21st December 1790, and recorded in the Sheriff-Court books at Aberdeen 24th December 1790.

"Several kind neighbours, knowing the untoward positon in which John Leslie was placed, came forward and most handsomely offered their security to him if he could succeed in buying the lease from the Lumsdens. This, after a lengthened negotiaton, he succeeded in doing. Henry and Alexander Lumsden agreed to dispose of their remaining interest in the lease from Whitsunday 1795, on consideration of receiving the sum of £3727 : 10s. for the lease, and £20 a-year to Henry Lumsden for his lifetime in lieu of his factorship. In consequence of this agreement, Henry and Alexander Lumsden assigned the lease to Charles Bannerman, advocate in Aberdeen, agent for the trustees, 26th April 1796. These trustees were Miss Elizabeth Fraser of Castle Fraser, Alexander Burnett, Esq. of Kemnay, and Colonel Horne Dalrymple Elphinstone of Logie, who had become security for John Leslie until the price of the lease should be paid up by yearly instalments.

"In 1813, the whole sum, £3727 : 10s., the price of the lease, being paid up, the trustees were released, and John Leslie got the lease into his own possession, so that he became full proprietor, and had the command of his paternal inheritance. With a view of providing better for his younger children, instead of renouncing the lease in his own favour and then destroying it, he kept it up as distinct right in his own person, which could be transmitted to his heirs and assigns whomsoever, as a separate fund from the annual rent of £733 : 13 : 4 payable to the heir of entail in possession under the lease. This arrangement proved a serious misfortune. Having little knowledge of business, and the management of country affairs, and being of an easy temper, and being embarrassed by having borrowed money to pay the price of the lease and to maintain his family, he found himself in difficulties. To relieve himself from these, for inconsiderable grassums he let excellent farms at rents far under their value, and agents lent him money at ruinous interest on the security of the lease. One agent actually got possession of the lease as security for money advanced by him, and thus matters were as bad as if the lease never been purchased.

"John Irvine got a lease of Old Town of Balquhain for four times nineteen years, or seventy-six years, from John Leslie in 1814. Colonel Charles Leslie, twenty-sixth Baron of Balquhain, John Leslie’s fifth son, in 1859, purchased the remainder of this lease, 31 years, from John Irvine’s representatives for £2192 : 8 : 11.

"At length John Leslie got so involved in his difficulties, that, 23d June 1825, he assigned the lease and the woods of the estate of Balquhain, valued at £6000, to his eldest son, Ernest Leslie, and to Mr. Fraser of Strichen, Mr. Fraser of Lovat, and John Ewing, advocate in Aberdeen, as trustrees, reserving to himself an annual sum for his maintenance, and appointing the balance for the payment of his debts and for providing patrimonies for his younger children.

"In 1796 the farm of Aquhorties, consisting of nearly 800 acres, was out of lease. It was in a miserable state, only some scattered fields here and there being under cultivation. The other parts were either hills covered with heath, or low marshy lands. It happened that the venerable Bishop Hay, Vicar-Apostolic of the Lowland district of Scotland, at that time was anxious to get a place where he might establish a college for the education of young men destined for the priesthood to serve on the Scotch mission, the French revolution having obliged the Scotch colleges at Paris and Douai to be closed. The good bishop having private property of his own, which he piously devoted to the service of the church and the good of religion, took a lease of the farm of Aquhorties for ninety-nine years. He built a college, and commenced agricultural operations. He was so successful that in the course of a few years the face of the barren country was completely changed. The whole farm was regularly laid out in fields and enclosed and fenced. Every acre capable of cultivation was brought in by trenching and draining, and the remainder was planted so as to be ornamental and useful. Aquhorties remained the only Catholic college in Scotland till 1829, when the college was transferred to Blairs in Kincardineshire. In 1844, the representatives of Bishop Hay renounced the lease of Aquhorties on condition of receiving an annual sum during the currency of the lease.

"John Leslie married, at Terregles Castle in Drumfriesshire, 14th November 1774, Violet Dalzell, daughter of John Dalzell, Esq. of Barnquosh (grandson of Sir Robert Dalzell, Bart. of Glenae, and cousin of Robert, Earl of Carnwath, who was attainted and condemned to be beheaded in 1715, but obtained a reprieve), by his wife, the Honourable Harriet Gordon, only daughter of William, sixth Viscount Kenmure, Lord Lochinvar, who suffered for his zeal in the cause of the Stuarts, being beheaded on Tower Hill 24th February 1716. William, Viscount Kenmure had married the Honourable Lady Mary Dalzell, sister of Robert, Earl of Carnwath, so that Violet Dalzell's father and mother were cousins. She was a lady possessing great beauty and personal charms, adorned with every virtue, and of graceful and pleasing manners. By her John Leslie had issue --

" I. Ernest Leopold Patrick, who succeeded him as twenty-third Baron of Balquhain.

" II. John, born at Tullos 1st May 1780. He was sent with his elder brother, Ernest, to the Scotch college at Ratisbon in Bavaria, in 1789, when he was only nine years of age. In 1795 he returned to Scotland, and, as he intended to enter the Austrian service, he prepared himself for the military profession by mathematics and the art of fortification. He left Fetternear 4th October 1797, and sailed from Leith 13th October for the Continent, and proceeded to Vienna. In a letter to his mother, dated 4th December 1797, he stated that he had been kindly received by Major-general Worensdorff, of the Polish Guards, also by Prince Lobkowitz, to whose regiment of Light Dragoons he had been appointed, and that he was about to proceed to Italy, to join his regiment, which was then serving in that country; and that he proposed to call on Count Leslie as he passed through Gratz to Styria, on his way to Italy, because the English ambassador at Vienna had told him that Madame Buchenberg, wife of Count Lilsen, colonel of the regiment in which his brother Ernest was serving, had mentioned to the ambassador that Count Leslie had said that he wished to see some member of the family. By another letter from him, dated at Padua, 1st February 1798, we learn that he left Vienna 12th January of that year, and had called upon Count Leslie in Gratz, and that he had joined Prince Lobkowitz's Light Calvalry regiment as a cadet. He likewise mentions that his brother Ernest was then with his corps in Bohemia. In another letter, dated 18th February 1798, he says that his uniform was white with blue facings and he was learning his exercises. In a letter written to his father, dated in camp under the Alps at Venola, three miles behind Genoa, 22d December 1798, he states that he had been wounded in the leg on 17th October, but that he did not go to the hospital at Lodi, as he had soon got well again, and had since been in several engagements. The greatest battle, he says, was at Genola, 4th December 1798. He was at the siege of Alexandria, July 1799. By a letter, dated near Tortona, 29th July 1799, he informs his friends that he had been engaged on the 19th, 20th, and 22d June at the battles which took place at the castle of St. Giovanni. He was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant, and attached to the staff of Marshal Suwarroff as an orderly officer. He was present at the battle of Novi, 15th August 1799; at the siege of Genoa, in April 1800; at the battle of Marengo, 14th June 1800; at the battle of the Mincio, 25th December 1800. He afterwards returned to Scotland, and attended the funeral of his brother-in-law, Alexander Fraser of Strichen, in 1803. He took a passage in a foreign vessel then lying at Aberdeen, and about to sail for Dantzig, he having the intention of rejoining his regiment then in Poland. The vessel sailed from Aberdeen 3d December 1803, and was never afterwards heard of. It was supposed that she foundered at sea, and that all on board perished.

" III. Joseph Emmanuel Leslie, born 5th October 1781, and died 21st December 1784.

" IV. James Michael, born 25th April 1784. He succeeded his nephew Count John Leslie as twenty-fifth Baron of Balquhain in 1844.

" V. Charles, born 24th April 1785. He succeeded his brother, James Michael Leslie, as twenty-sixth Baron of Balquhain in 1849.

" VI. Anthony, born 30th November 1787. He entered the British army in 1808, and served in North America with the 8th Regiment. He got a lieutenancy in the Glengary Rifle Corps, and was present at all the engagements in which that distinguished corps signalised itself during the war in Canada, from 1812 to 1814. He settled in Canada, where he remained for many years, and then returned to England and took up his residence in London, where he still lives. He married, in January 1840, Ann Monagan, but had no issue.

" VII. Edward, born 30th September 1792. He was an Ensign in the German Legion. He died of a decline at Fetternear, 20th May 1813.

" VIII. Louis Xavier, born 14th October 1793. Twin brother of Francis Robert. He entered the British army, in which he attained the rank of major. He served in Canada in 1813, during the war; in France, after the battle of Waterloo; at the Cape of Good Hope, during the Caffre War, where he was much engaged with his regiment, the 72d Highlanders. He resides at Tillydrone, Old Aberdeen.

" IX. Francis Robert, born 14th October 1793. Twin brother of Louis Xavier. He entered the British army, and served in the German Legion. He joined the army in Spain under the Duke of Wellington, and during the operations in the south of France in 1814. He was at the siege of Bayonne, the battle of Toulouse, and the battle of Waterloo. He was one of the officers who took possession of the Bariere de l'Etoile at Paris in 1815. He died at Leslie Lodge, 17th July 1831.

" X. Amelia, born at Kingswells 24th April 1777; married in 1801 to Alexander Fraser, Esq. of Strichen, by whom she had a son, Thomas Alexander, Lord Lovat. She died 27th August 1860.

" XI. Harriet Ann, born at Tullos 24th November 1778. She died unmarried at Fetternear 6th June 1805, and was buried in the old chapel there.

" XII. Teresa Frances, born 27th March 1783. She died unmarried at Fetternear, of a decline, 31st May 1801.

" XIII. Helen, born at Fetternear 17th May 1786. She died unmarried at Edinburgh of a decline, 20th December 1811, and was buried in the Canongate church.

" XIV. Violet Winnifred, born at Fetternear 18th April 1789. She is unmarried, and resides in Aberdeen.

" XV. Margaret Catherine, born 5th June 1790. She died unmarried, of a decline, at Leslie Lodge, 4th September 1830, and was buried in the old chapel at Fetternear.

"John Leslie, twenty-second Baron of Balquhain, died 27th February 1828, aged seventy-seven, and was succeeded by his eldest son Ernest, Count Leslie, twenty-third Baron of Balquahain. After the death of her husband, Mrs. Violet Leslie went to live at Leslie Lodge, or Aquhorties, where she died, 23d September 1836, in the eighty-eighth year of her age. This venerable lady was upwards of sixty years resident on the estate of Balquhain, beloved and respected by all classes in the country. She retained all her faculties to the last; and as she possessed a peculiarly retentive memory, her conversation was most interesting and entertaining, especially when she related stories of 1715 and 1745, which she had heard from her relations and friends, many of whom had suffered in the Stuart cause. She used to tell how she and her sisters dressed themselves up in the cloak and gown of the brave Countess of Nithsdale, in which her husband, the Earl, effected his escape from the Tower of London -- the relics being preserved in the Castle of Terregles, of which her father had a lease from the Nithsdale family. She used also to tell how, when she was at school at the convent at York, the head of her grandfather, Lord Kenmure, still remained on the Michaelgate Bar, and when it was taken down by the order of the government, all the people congratulated her."