Global Migrations Conference in Edinburgh

By: Nick Draper

On Friday 4th and Saturday 5th July I was in Edinburgh at the Global Migrations of the Scottish People since c. 1600 conference, organised by the Scottish Centre for Diaspora Studies, based at the University of Edinburgh.  The conference was timed to coincide with Homecoming 2014, a year-long programme of events aimed primarily at people overseas of Scottish descent that includes under its umbrella the Commonwealth Games, the Ryder Cup and the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn. In turn, Homecoming 2014 (the last such event was in 2009) coincides with the September referendum on independence for Scotland, so that the questions of Scottish nationalism and identity raised in the conference have particular resonance not only for Scotland but for the rest of the United Kingdom. The conference itself, sponsored by the Scottish Government and held at the National Museum of Scotland, presented a political balance in its opening by Gordon Brown and its welcome address from the Scottish Government by Humza Yousaf, Minister for External Affairs and International Development.

I gave a brief paper on the work of LBS and specifically the prominent place of Scottish slave-owners in the compensation records, as part of a panel on ‘Scotland and Black Slavery’ chaired by Phil Morgan of Johns Hopkins. My fellow-speakers were David Alston, whose meticulous work on Highlander Scots in Demerara, Essequibo and Berbice is available on the Slaves and Highlanders website, and Eric Graham, an associate of the LBS project, who spoke on Burns & the Sugar Plantocracy of Ayrshire, the title of his recently republished book detailing an intense regional nexus of slavery connections. The panel represented part of the effort underway to re-inscribe colonial slavery into the history of Scotland and its diaspora, an effort in parallel to our own work on Britain & Ireland as a whole and which seeks to complicate the dominant narrative of Scots as the historic objects of English colonisation.

I was not able to stay for the conference sessions on Sunday 6th, but in the time I was there I was struck by the impossibility of imagining at present an equivalent conference on Global Migrations of the English People, or indeed an English celebration equivalent to Homecoming 2014. English nationalism is not (yet) the object of academic enquiry, nor is it a respectable phenomenon in popular culture: but the effortless appropriation of British history by the English and the routine elision of the two could not survive the break-up of the United Kingdom, one result of which would surely be a need to discover a specific English history and English identity not as parochial and limited but as global and inclusive (difficult though that will be). I was also struck by an apparent gender division: based on the conference panels, the writing in Scotland of the history of the Scottish people appears to be a masculine preserve, whereas the new imperial history of Scotland is being undertaken by distinguished female academics in universities not in Scotland but in the former colonies themselves.


Some Thoughts On My Favourite History Blogs

By: Rachel Lang

Last Tuesday I took four 17-year-old work experience students to Kenwood House in Hampstead, North London. Kenwood was the home of Dido Elizabeth Belle (1761–1804), the great-niece of the Chief Justice William Murray, Lord Mansfield (1709-1793); she was the daughter of his nephew Sir John Lindsay and an African woman enslaved in the West Indies named Maria Belle. Tomorrow, I’m taking the same students to see the film Belle, Hollywood’s take on the story of her life. I thought it would be interesting to compare the film with the history as it actually happened – but then I discovered Miranda Kaufmann’s blog on this very subject and realised it has been covered much better elsewhere. This got me thinking about a wide range of other blogs which I’ve also read with great enjoyment, so I thought I would share with you my favourite sites. This is a blog post about other blogs!

Miranda Kaufmann  is a historian of the African presence in Tudor and Stuart England. Her blog often describes her reaction to the portrayal of Black history in the mainstream media and in museums. For example, listening to an interview with Onyeka on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme in December last year led to a post about ‘Egyptians’ in Tudor England. I like blogs which challenge other people’s points of view, so I especially enjoyed her post ‘Presenting the Black Past – How History Must Change the Media’.I also recommend the blog site ‘Black Africans in Renaissance Europe’ for discussions about the representation of Black people in medieval and early modern paintings and for the way this art is presented in galleries.

Many museums and archives have their own blogs and a large number of guest bloggers make these sites invaluable for the range and unpredictability of the subjects they cover. Perhaps one of the best and most readableis the blog of The National Archives in London. I particularly liked a post, ‘Calling All A Level History Teachers’, which gives an overview of the collections of documents available online covering major developments from the seventeenth to the twentieth centuries. This led me to take a look at the trial documents of Charles I, available on their Civil War website. One joy of reading blogs is that one topic leads you to another link and so on until you’ve found something fascinating which is far from your own specialised subject.

The National Archives and Records Administration in Washington hosts a blog site called Rediscovering Black History; most of these posts are about twentieth century America but there are also discussions of immigration and emancipation which are useful for historians of the Caribbean. Browsing this site I found a post ‘Federal Records Documenting Caribbean Immigrants: 1890-1930’  which led me to an article in Prologue magazine entitled Ancestors from the West Indies. Downloadable as a pdf, it gives invaluable information on American sources for West Indian immigration.

Nantes History MuseumThe Black Presence in Britain  has a great guest blog site. I recently read a post here on ‘Somali Seafarers in Wales’, which was not something I expected to be able to find out about. Their section on ‘Black People in Europe’ includes an article by Rovianne Matovu about the Slavery trail at Nantes Museum in North-western France.

Finally, I want to mention three blogs written by people researching their own family histories. If you are interested in eighteenth century connections between Britain and Jamaica then it’s worth exploring Anne Powers’ site ‘A Parcel of Ribbons’ in detail. Dorothy Kew’s site ‘My Jamaican Family’ includes an interesting series about her upbringing in Jamaica in the early to mid-twentieth century. And although it hasn’t been updated for a while, I did enjoy the series of blog posts on the ‘Finding Family’ website both for their historical details and the immediacy of the author’s reactions to her discoveries. Happy reading!

Three Men in a Canoe: Researching Caribbean Family History

Guest Blog by: Abigail Bernard[1]

My ancestors were enslaved on the Mount Pleasant Estate in Carriacou, Grenada. Whilst conducting research about them, I consulted three separate on-line resources that, when connected together, were able to give me an insight into the lives of three men who worked on the same estate.

The first resource I came across was The Third Report of the Commissioner of Inquiry into the Administration of Civil and Criminal Justice in the West Indies, dated 5 October 1826.[2] This was written by Sir Fortunatus Dwarris and presented to the House of Commons. Although the main report does not mention Grenada, the appendix includes a section on the island and deals with complaints by enslaved people to Grenada’s Guardians of Slaves.

Map of Grenada

The report reveals that three enslaved men named Gregware, Antoine and Dan, of the Mount Pleasant Estate in Carriacou, stole a canoe and sailed to mainland Grenada in September 1821.  They presented themselves to the Governor complaining of ill treatment and not receiving enough food allowance. Dan McKellar, David Logan and James Wilson, Guardians of Carriacou, denied these allegations. In a letter dated 24 September 1821 they said “we declare that none of these slaves, or any other from that property came to us with any complaint whatever; if they had we would have done our duty.”[3]  They also stated “we have been acquainted with the slaves of Mr [Thomas] Tarleton’s estate for a number of years and know them to be the most turbulent set of slaves in the island.” [4]

Depositions from Francis Preston, Cooper and Overseer and George McNab, Head Overseer dated 22 September 1821 and Thomas Davis, Manager dated 26 September 1821 supported the Guardian’s argument that no ill treatment had taken place and that there was no lack of food provisions.[5]

Francis Preston stated that he “found Gregware deficient in duty and deserving of punishment” and “Antoine to be of a most turbulent disposition, and the ringleader of frequent disturbances.”  He explained that on account of Antoine being absent from work, “he received a punishment not exceeding twelve lashes.” [6]

The names of Antoine and Gregware sounded familiar to me. Upon reviewing the Slave Register of Grenada for 1821, I saw that their names were listed under the decrease table as being sent to Trinidad.[7]  Dan, the third escapee, remained on the Mount Pleasant estate as the Guardians stated “he had no complaint and was prevailed on by the other two to accompany them.”[8]  At the time of being banished to Trinidad, Antoine was recorded as being aged about 34 and Gregware was said to be 38.[9] The names of their family members they left behind are unknown.

Mount Pleasant Estate Decrease, Grenada Slave Register 1821

Further searches of Trinidad slave registers on were made to find out where they were sent. There were very good matches for them in the slave registers of 1822 and 1825, in two men named Antoine Logan and Gregware Todd at the estate of Alexander McMillan.[10] The ages recorded for these men in 1822 were younger than those found in the Grenada return of 1821; They were listed as being 28 and 32 years old respectively. Additionally, they were listed as being born on the island of St Vincent, not in Carriacou. This makes me wonder: How much was McMillan aware of their past?

Return of Alexander McMillan,Trinidad Slave Register 1822

The LBS database gives useful background information about claims associated with the estates of Sir Fortunatus Dwarris, Alexander McMillan, and Thomas Tarleton. Sir Fortunatus Dwarris, the author of the Third Report, owned enslaved people on the Golden Grove Estate in St. George, Jamaica.  He and Sarah Dwarris shared the compensation claim of £3,277 18s 3d for 175 enslaved people.3  Interestingly, two years after writing the Third Report, Sir Fortunatus wrote a pamphlet in which he argued for the improvement of the conditions of enslaved people and the gradual abolition of slavery.[11]

Two of the slave-owners, Thomas Tarleton of Carriacou and Alexander McMillan of Trinidad, were both deceased by the time claims were made in 1836 and 1838 for compensation of the enslaved people on their estates.  Mary McMillan of Scotland made a claim for the 31 enslaved people who were on Alexander McMillan’s estate at emancipation and who were valued at £1,785 3s 2d.  Meanwhile, Thomas Tarleton’s son, Rev. John Edward Tarleton received £6,526 2s 0d for the 256 enslaved people on the Mount Pleasant Estate.

My three times great grandfather, York Quashie, was one of those 256 people.  Looking at the 1821 slave register, I can see that he was 11 years old when Gregware and Antoine departed.[12]It has left me reflecting on how much this event would have affected him and his family.

I’d previously viewed the letter book from the Mount Pleasant Estate, but was unable to read the poor handwriting. Therefore, this was the first time I had read any primary resources about the estate where my family was enslaved.  With more records being made available on-line, the task of finding your family and learning about where, how and with whom they lived can become less arduous.  Having such records available electronically has opened up new avenues of further research for me.

[1] The LBS Team would like to thank Abigail for this guest blog. Abigail is a researcher who specializes in community heritage, oral and social history, genealogy and factual television research.

[2] The Third Report of the Commissioner of Inquiry into the Administration of Civil and Criminal Justice in the West Indies (1826) by Sir Fortunatus Dwarris

[3] Dwarris  p.282

[4] Dwarris  p.282

[5] Dwarris  p.281 & 282

[6] Dwarris  p.282

[7] Grenada Slave Return 1821: All except St. George, TNA T 71/276

[8] Dwarris  p.282

[9] TNA T 71/276

[10] Trinidad Slave Return 1822, T 71/510/529 and Trinidad Slave Return 1825, T 71/513/376

[11] Sir Fortunatus Dwarries 1828 The West India Question Plainly Stated

[12] Grenada 1821: Carriacou Island: list of slaves, T 71/275 p.105

Researching Female Slave-owners at the Huntington Library

By: Hannah Young

Having been granted a W.M. Keck Foundation Fellowship, I am currently in the midst of a three month research trip to San Marino’s beautiful Huntington Library. Using material from the extensive Stowe Papers, the Library’s largest single collection, I hope to expand on work already undertaken on Jamaican slaveholder Anna Eliza Elletson Brydges, Duchess of Chandos and her daughter, Anna Eliza (Brydges) Grenville, Duchess of Buckingham and Chandos. [1]

Through examining diaries, correspondence and a range of family and legal papers I hope to be able to use the experience of these women to investigate the gendered nature of property-ownership and transmission and interrogate the significant, but circumscribed, role women played in the complicated webs of plantation-ownership and inheritance. Keen to adopt a holistic approach to the history of slavery and slave-ownership, I also hope locate the slave-ownership of the Anna Elizas within their wider familial experience, socially, culturally and politically. This will allow me to examine the extent to which slave-owning was integrated into a woman’s life and lifestyle, by exploring how exactly slave-ownership figured in the lives of those aristocratic women who engaged in it. Did it play a part in the construction of their wider identity and, if so, how?

Currently about a third of the way of my time here, (that’s according to my diary – I have no idea where that time has gone!) any initial thoughts are extremely rudimentary. However, the experience has certainly been fruitful and I have already discovered a great deal that provides food for thought. Looking, for example, at the personal correspondence of Anna Eliza (Brydges) Grenville, has been particularly illuminating. Born into the highest echelons of elite society, Anna Eliza had a network of friends and associates across the British Empire. What is especially interesting, however, is the manner in which her vision of empire is constructed. The West Indies as a colonial space is noticeably absent. Rather, empire is the site of naval supremacy and military success. Whilst the fear of disease and death underpins much of Anna Eliza’s  trans-imperial correspondence, it is also clear that empire was important to her as a place which offered the possibility of personal and national triumph. Perhaps unsurprisingly given her status as a Jamaican absentee, the brutal reality of West Indian slavery remains entirely missing from this triumphalist picture.

Noticeably, the first instance I have come across of Anna Eliza, mentioning her Jamaican estate comes in a discussion concerning Hope Plantation’s compensation claim. £6630 5S 6D was ultimately successfully claimed by George Neville Grenville, the uncle of her husband Richard Grenville, and John Campbell, a trustee of their marriage settlement, for 379 people enslaved on Hope, a property Anna Eliza had inherited from her mother.  ‘I am greatly disappointed at what you say respecting the appropriation of the Compensation Money for the Hope Estate’, she wrote to husband Richard Grenville in 1835. ‘I was fully aware that the Estate being in Settlement both Chandos’s [her son’s] Trustees & myself had a right to give in our Claims but I would not do that or even allude to it’ she angrily admonished, unimpressed with how the Duke had spent the compensation money. She had believed that ‘the best thing for all Parties’ would be to use the money ‘to clear off Mr Humphries entirely & regain the property.’[2] Here Anna Eliza was speaking of Middleton, a different Jamaican plantation that the Duke himself had independently purchased; she became quite irate when she became aware that this had not been the case.

This brief snapshot gives us a quick insight into the extremely complex, and inherently gendered, nature of property ownership in the early nineteenth century, particularly amongst the aristocracy. The common law principle of coverture may have been emblematic of women’s marginalisation within the British legal system, but the laws of equity ensured that women like Anna Eliza could access property.Indeed, Anna Eliza was quite aware that she had a right to claim for the enslaved people on Hope Estate, who were by law her property. That she made a conscious decision not to, however, suggests that notions of individual and familial ownership cannot always be entirely distinguished. For Anna Eliza, any personal interest was subsumed within a familial one; she acted as she believed was best not just for herself but for the whole. That she was unafraid to chastise her husband when she believed he was not acting in the best interests of the family also suggests that this attitude cannot simply be attributed to her position as a woman. It does, however, demonstrate that in the early nineteenth century the relationship between family, identity and property, including that in enslaved people, was a complex and contested one.

[1] Guide to British Historical Manuscripts in the Huntington Library. San Marion: Huntington Library and Art Gallery, 1982. p.145.

[2] Huntington Library STG Box 74/44, Anna Eliza to Richard Grenville, September 15th 1835.

Local Roots / Global Routes

The Local Roots / Global Routes webpage has been launched with the posting of a blog by the project’s research intern Mike Watson. Local Roots / Global Routes is a collaborative project between LBS and Hackney Museum and Archives. Running from December 2013 to October 2014 the project aims to create a Key Stage 3 (ages 13-14) resource concerning the links between Hackney and transatlantic slavery. This will involve exploring the black presence in the borough as well as finding out more about Hackney residents with links to slave-ownership, the production of goods produced by the enslaved, and abolition. Local Roots / Global Routes is one of 15 projects which are part of the Share Academy programme. Share Academy is a partnership project between University College London, University of the Arts London, and London Museums Group – funded by Arts Council England (ACE). It aims to develop and foster relationships between specialist London museums and academics.

Rethinking Bloomsbury: A Public Roundtable Discussion

By: James Dawkins

1826 Map of Bloomsbury, Western SegmentRethinking Bloomsbury was a public roundtable discussion held at UCL’s Petrie Museum on Tuesday 26th April, 2014.  This interdisciplinary event was organised by UCL’s Legacies of British Slave-ownership project (LBS) in partnership with the university’s Petrie Museum, and sponsored by the Joint Faculty Institute of Graduate Studies (J-Figs).

London’s Bloomsbury area is prominent for its connection to art, culture, education and literature.  More specifically, it is a district that has historical nexuses to well-known writers, is the home of some of London’s best loved museums and is the base of UCL’s main campus.  Having said this, new research being undertaken across a number of UCL’s faculties has uncovered a myriad of forgotten connections which have led the university to reconsider the historical representation of the area.  The Rethinking Bloomsbury event emerged as a result of these findings and provided a stimulating intellectual forum within which this new research was discussed.   Five UCL-based speakers were invited to provide a five minute presentation on their work.  This was followed by a thought provoking discussion amongst the audience and the presenters regarding the finer points of their studies and how their findings can be used to enrich current understandings on the history of Bloomsbury.

The first presenter, Caroline Bressey, used paintings and drawings of Black people to speak about their academic, theatrical and political presence in Bloomsbury between 1919 and 1939Debbie Challis spoke about Francis Galton and Flinders Petrie and their impact on concepts and practices of racial science in Britain.  Subhadra Das elaborated upon activities of Francis Galton and discussed the collection of his belongings bequeathed to UCL and his ideas on eugenics.  Nicholas Draper gave a talk on Bloomsbury’s connection to British slavery and highlighted the considerable number of slave-owners that once resided in the area.  The final speaker, John J Johnston, spoke about Bloomsbury’s LGBT community and illuminated a number of historical figures from the academic and creative worlds who contributed to Bloomsbury’s diverse ambience.

We had a great turn out for the event which was rounded off with a drinks reception, exhibition on the slave-owners of Bloomsbury and further discussion on the snippets of research presented earlier on in the evening.

Margaret McPherson Grant and the legacies of slave-derived wealth

By: Rachel Lang

Margaret MacPherson GrantMargaret McPherson was born in 1834, three months before the Emancipation Act came into effect, and she never visited the West Indies. An only child, she was the daughter of the local doctor in Aberlour in Banffshire, north-east Scotland. Her mother was said to have married beneath her, although herself only the daughter of an impoverished minister.[1] At the age of twenty, Margaret’s life changed forever when she inherited a vast Jamaican fortune from her childless, self-made uncle Alexander Grant. Alexander left £300,000 in personalty as well as property in London, Scotland and Jamaica.[2] Margaret became hugely wealthy, dependent upon no-one and without social equal, which allowed her to live an unorthodox and ultimately tragic life. Margaret provides an unusual example of how the legacies of slave-derived wealth in Britain continued to be felt long after slavery had been abolished.

After gaining her inheritance, Margaret lived in the mansion built by her uncle on the banks of the Spey river about a mile from the village of Aberlour. Her main interests were salmon fishing and the Episcopal Church.[3] She occasionally visited London where, in 1864, she met Charlotte Temple, the 22 year old daughter of a Wiltshire landowner. They formed a close friendship and in the autumn of that year Charlotte came to visit Margaret in Aberlour, staying until the following spring. A few weeks after Charlotte returned to her parents’ house in Wiltshire, Margaret was back in London again, when she sent a telegraph to Charlotte asking for a meeting. Margaret visited Charlotte’s parents and begged them to let Charlotte live with her permanently, promising that because of her love for Charlotte, she would make her the heir to her Jamaican fortune. After much discussion, Charlotte’s parents agreed. Margaret had previously bequeathed her property to the Episcopal Church, but in 1865 on another visit to London, she changed her will, leaving the bulk of her fortune to an elderly aunt and thereafter to Charlotte: “She goes to the [lawyer’s] office and brings out the pen to Miss Temple, who was waiting in the carriage, saying to her, ‘Do you know what I have been doing? I have been making you my heir, and here is the pen I did it with; keep it!”[4]

Throughout the late 1860s, Margaret and Charlotte’s life together in Aberlour House was blighted by Margaret’s increasing alcoholism. “After getting her fortune, Miss Grant seemed to have given reins to herself. She got into a habit of tippling to a large extent, drinking not merely wine, but beer and brandy – a bottle and a half of brandy a-day sometimes. Miss Temple used arguments to wean her from that, and appealed to her self-respect, but without avail. She hid her failings when she could, and when she could not did her best to do so.”[5] Several newspaper reports after her death described periods of abstinence and times of excess. Her father appears to have had a calming effect, although he could not dictate the terms of her life; he came to live with them in Aberlour House in 1870 and she gave up alcohol for a while, only to relapse after his death in April 1871.[6]

Despite their difficulties, Margaret and Charlotte loved and cared for each other – perhaps, according to disapproving comments in newspapers after Margaret’s death, too much so. “Something like a marriage had taken place between them. Each pledged herself to celibacy; Miss Grant ‘married’ Miss Temple, placing on the latter’s marriage-finger a suitable ring, and thenceforth designating her ‘Charley’; Miss Temple not only reciprocated the extraordinary affection, but likewise manifested similar extraordinary proofs of it – she termed herself ‘Wifie’ in her letters to Miss Grant, she addressed the latter as ‘Jamie’ and in short, a lot of remarkable tomfoolery went on between the two.”[7] Public records of their lives at this time consist of reports of salmon fishing and grouse shooting expeditions and of entering stock into local agricultural shows.[8]

Margaret made large donations to a variety of good causes, in particular to the church: “Her almost boundless wealth enabled her to promote and carry out schemes of charity… Every popular movement had her sympathy and support”.[9] She continued to oversee the management of her Jamaican estates, dictating her correspondence to Charlotte when she communicated with her Jamaican factors. Despite being described as “very masculine in appearance and manly in dress”, Margaret’s wealth and charitable giving afforded considerable social leeway as the “’strong-minded’ but none the less highly respected proprietrix of that fine Speyside property”.[10]

In August 1875, the London Standard reported that, in the space of a few hours, a Captain Yeatman “bagged 26 brace of grouse, 2 hares and 2 plovers” on land belonging to Miss MacPherson Grant of Aberlour.[11] It’s not clear when Harry Farr Yeatman first became known in Aberlour, but by December 1875, Charlotte had become engaged to marry him. Margaret’s reaction to Charlotte’s betrothal veered from one extreme to another depending on her alcohol intake. At times she welcomed the alliance, offering to host their marriage in Aberlour House, and at other times she was distraught about the idea of Charlotte leaving her and scathing about the prospect of Charlotte’s potential “brats of children”.[12]

Shortly after the announcement of Charlotte’s engagement, a fire broke out in Aberlour House, the origins of which are unclear. After the fire, Margaret suffered what would probably in modern terms be described as a psychotic episode. Despite being shepherded to safety while the fire raged, Margaret became convinced that she had rescued a servant girl herself and carried her to safety. Much more worryingly, “She got so terrified and frightened she seemed to think there was a hole in her head, and asked people to look for it. She got her hair clipped sometimes twice a-day. She beseeched her attendants to look for the hole.” Living in a mire of unhappiness and drinking to excess, Margaret suffered from paralysis in her legs and died in April 1877, just two weeks before her 43rd birthday.[13]

Margaret revoked her will in November 1876 and died intestate. Her fortune was inherited by a cousin on her father’s side whom she had probably never met. Charlotte contested the settlement, claiming that Margaret was of frail mind at the time and under the undue influence of her Jamaican factor. A compromise was agreed, whereby Charlotte was allocated £10,000, most of which she exchanged for a watch she had previously given to Margaret, and Margaret’s diamond brooch.[14] After her death, Margaret’s estate was valued for probate at £195,500 including moveable estate on Bryan Castle, Brampton Bryan and Low Layton estates in Jamaica.[15]

There are three lasting legacies to Margaret in the north-east of Scotland. Firstly, she donated £3000 to pay for the construction of St Margaret’s Episcopal Church, still at the centre of Episcopal life in Aberlour. She also donated the organ to Inverness Cathedral, which has only lately been replaced. Finally, and most significantly, she was the first benefactress of the Aberlour Orphanage, still in existence today as the Aberlour Childcare Trust, which provides help to over 6,000 of Scotland’s most vulnerable children, young people and their families each year.[16] Although the websites of each institution describe Margaret’s role, none say where her wealth came from; the brutality of sun-drenched life on Jamaican plantations was a far cry from Margaret’s existence in Scotland.

[1] Aberdeen Weekly Journal, 27/12/1877, Issue 7131 p. 3.

[2] Alexander Grant in the LBS database: Will of Alexander Grant of Arlington Street, Middlesex, PROB 11/2193/143. Alexander Grant’s fortune included £300,000 of moveable property as well as property in London and Scotland and plantations in Jamaica.

[3] See for example: Belfast Newsletter 23/02/1859 Issue 13315; Dundee Courier 02/05/1859 Issue 2217; Aberdeen Journal 08/08/1860; The Leeds Mercury 17/09/1863 Issue 7935.

[4] Petition of Charlotte Yeatman for the sequestration of the estates of Miss Margaret MacPherson Grant, describing their lives together and reported in several newspapers including Aberdeen Weekly Journal 14/07/1877 Issue 6989 p. 8, Dundee Courier & Argus and Northern Warder, 17/07/1877, Issue 7483 p. 3. Quote from Lachlan Shaw, History of the province of Moray. Comprising the counties of Elgin and Nairn, the greater part of the county of Inverness and a portion of the county of Banff (Glasgow, Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1882) p. 176.

[5] Quote from Lachlan Shaw, History of the province of Moray, p. 178.

[6] Another report states “Her father seems to have had no power over her at all”, Aberdeen Weekly Journal, 27/12/1877, Issue 7131 p. 3.

[7] Lachlan Shaw, History of the province of Moray, p. 178. Letters between Margaret and Charlotte are similarly mentioned in Aberdeen Weekly Journal, 27/12/1877, Issue 7131 p. 3 and reports of letters which could be made public in court appear in many other newspapers, for example, Sheffield & Rotherham Independent, 01/11/1877, Issue 5876 p. 5.

[8] For example, Morning Post, 30/09/1864, Issue 28328 p. 3; Morning Post 16/08/1869, Issue 29855 p. 2; Glasgow Herald, 29/07/1869, Issue 9226, p. 4.

[9] Aberdeen Weekly Journal, 18/04/1877, Issue 6745 p. 2.

[10] See for example, Bristol Mercury, 07/07/1877, Issue 4554 p. 3; Lloyd’s Weekly Newspaper, 08/07/1877, Issue 1807 p. 8.

[11] Standard, 14/08/1875, Issue15928  p. 3.

[12] Lachlan Shaw, History of the province of Moray, p. 182. Aberdeen Weekly Journal, 02/01/1878, Issue 7136 pp. 3-4

[13] Aberdeen Weekly Journal, 27/12/1877, Issue 7131 p. 3.

[14] Lachlan Shaw, History of the province of Moray, p. 178. Aberdeen Weekly Journal, 27/12/1877, Issue 7131 p. 3.

[15] Inventory of Margaret McPherson Grant of Aberlour, SC2/40/30.