THE COLONSAY CATECHIST - Part 7
Dr. Domhnall Uilleam Stiubhart's series of articles now returns to the specific details of Colonsay's experience. Readers are reminded that the finished work will now be published in book form. When the series is complete, information about such a publication will appear here. Advance subscribers and expressions of interest will be welcomed by the Editor.
Now, at last, we can turn back to Colonsay. You might remember the many problems of the parish of Jura and Colonsay at the beginning of the eighteenth century: the overwhelming size and unwieldiness of the parish itself, and indeed its presbytery, that of Kintyre; the reluctance of the local landowners, the heretors, to pay for any fresh expenses to do with the church; the uninspiring character of the local minister, the Rev. Neill Campbell, whose first few years in the parish had possibly broken him; and maybe rivalries within the presbytery itself. The parish may have been well worthy of official support; but the shortcomings of both local gentry and local clergy meant that that support would not be immediately forthcoming.
A schoolteacher in Colonsay
As we have seen, the Synod of Argyll, although the main church court in the region, did not provide the impetus for the extension of ecclesiastical authority which had so transformed the organisation of the presbyterian Church of Scotland – and indeed the lives of the inhabitants – on the west coast during the 1720s. Rather, such demands tended to come as a result of local presbyterial initiatives. However, the synod did play a crucial rôle in making them happen. Again, we have seen that most missionary activity was undertaken on the forfeited estates in the north-west mainland and also in the staunchly Catholic eastern Highlands. The parish of Jura and Colonsay, where neither island an obvious hotbed of jacobite sympathy, nor threatened by the inroads of Catholic priests, was hardly an immediate priority. However, there is some evidence to show that the Synod of Argyll was trying to ease the minister’s plight.
Edinburgh lawyers had long been suspicious – not to say jealous – of the vast independent legal powers wielded by the duke of Argyll through his heritable jurisdiction over much of the western seaboard of the Gàidhealtachd. In much the same way, the Synod of Argyll was able to operate as a church court largely independent of the central Church of Scotland. A 1690 act of parliament had allowed them the vacant benefices and stipends in their area for their own uses, while five years later they were awarded the Bishops’ Rents of Argyll and the Isles, monies which the crown was finding too difficult to collect. It was widely believed – incorrectly – that the synod was supposed to use the income for maintaining schools. In fact, it could also be employed "for other pious uses that shall occur within the bounds of the said synod, there being now more than ever in that place great need of preachers". Whatever the case, many Scottish clergy were rather unhappy about spending church money for educational purposes within the bounds of the Synod of Argyll.
We are fortunate that the Barons of the Exchequer shared these suspicions. In 1730 they demanded that the Synod forward accounts to Edinburgh of how the monies had been put to use since 1705. The synod not only sent them the relevant documents, but rather cheekily recorded that it had "superexpended" £722/16/4. It noted that a further £1,745/6/8, money no longer received as rent from the various new parishes erected during the 1720s, should also be counted as credit. Perhaps we need not have too much sympathy with the synod: it had, after all, spent £3,750 as salaries to the trustees for the rents. Some things never change: a huge sum – £2,984/13/10 – had been expended on lawyers’ fees. For our purposes, however, these accounts are primarily of interest because they show the synod was at last using money out of the Bishops’ Rents for the people of Colonsay.
As we have seen, there were no funds to help pay the Rev. Neill Campbell’s salary, even though a stipend of £100 Scots out of the Bishops’ Rents was being paid for Gigha from 1717, while three years later the new parish of Torosay on Mull was granted an annual stipend of £300 Scots. We might note that the Rev. John Campbell, minister of Kilarrow in Islay, who recommended in 1716 that Campbell be encouraged out of the same fund, was himself the beneficiary of £466/13/4 Scots every year. The minister of Jura and Colonsay, then, did not receive any aid; however, the island of Colonsay did: for three years, from 1722 to 1724, £16 per annum was paid to an unnamed schoolteacher there. It was doubtless at the same time that £80 – not an especially large sum by any means – was spent "Building a Meeting house in Collonsay & for a Schooll". Clearly, the Synod of Argyll was trying to help. However, the long-term problem was the size and shape of the parish. Ideally, it should be split in two.
The report of 1724
The main impetus for reforming the parish, however, came neither from the Synod of Argyll nor from the Presbytery of Kintyre. Rather, it came about because of one individual: the Rev. Neil Simson of Gigha (1690-1756). Although Simson had effectively been minister of the island since 1717 (with £100 Scots annually from the Bishops’ Rents), his charge was still officially part of its original parish – that is, Jura and Colonsay. Simson wanted his own parish, and was not slow to make his complaints known to the highest officials in the Church. As he came from a distinguished dynasty of Kintyre ministers – both his father and his grandfather had been staunch presbyterians and had suffered accordingly during the episcopalian ascendancy – he had the confidence and the contacts to make himself heard. Crucially, he won the support of Nicol Spence, agent of the Church, one of the most important men in Scotland of his time. On 15 September 1724 the Presbytery read a letter from Spence, wherein he stated that he had received from Simson an account that three quarters of the heretors of the parish had now consented to the creation of a new parish in Gigha and Cara. In other words, Simson had told Spence that a sufficient number of local landowners had given their assent for the Church to go ahead in dividing the parish. Summons were to be sent to all concerned; in addition, Spence "also desires that the Presbytery meet and appoint a Committee to perambulat the Bounds of the S[ai]ds Isles". The Presbytery decided "that this was an affair of such consequence" that it was to be obeyed at once.
The ministers certainly did not procrastinate. For the first time in a generation a deputation – including, of course, the Rev. Neil Campbell himself and Malcolm MacNeill of Colonsay – was sent to tour the bounds of the parish of Jura and Colonsay. The journey was already underway in the middle of October, there having been a delay because Campbell was "wind-bound in Collonsa". Ready on 2 December, the report made depressing reading. Here is the section concerning Colonsay:
West from Jura in the main Ocean, Lye the Isles of Collonsay & Orronsay, at the Distance of Seven Leagues from the place of Landing, This Dangerous Sea is called the Linne Tarshin. Their two Isles are divided by a small Sound, the Length of Both Eight miles, the Breadth two Miles and an half, the Catechiseable Persons four hundred, One Place of worship in the Center, the Heritor Malcom McNeil of Collonsay, The Rent Sixteen hundred Pounds Scots money Teinds included, which are two hundred and Eighty pound money foresd of which two hundred Pound paid to the minister and Eighty to the Bishop
The committee summed up the parish as follows:
this Large Tract under the Inspection of the Minr of Jura of about fourty Miles Length and thirty in Breadth is an Intollerable Charge for one Minr, who in passing & Repassing between the Islands is put to insupportable Charges and frequently wind Bound for ten and Twenty days, Yea sometimes for a Month or Six weeks, and for the most part miserably accomodate to the great prejudice of his health, from all qch it appears that even this Charge cannot in any tolerable manner be supply’d without two Minrs One in Jura & another in Collonsay & Orronsay, and the small Islands in the North & Norwest of Jura to be Annexed to the Parish of Luing & Saoil in the Presbytery of Lorn to which they Ly most Contiguous.
There are many such parish descriptions dating from the 1720s, a time when strenuous efforts were being made to extend the authority of church and state over the entire country, thereby to integrate even the most outlying districts into the ecclesiastical and political framework of Scotland, and, through educational and commercial initiatives, to make the land and people into useful additions to the British state.
The report of the parish of Jura and Colonsay was approved by the presbytery, and it was noted that "the greatest part of the Heritors" agreed with the proposal. However, it was recommended that the situation in Jura should continue as before "till some Method be fallen upon for a Disjunction as is a[bove]exprest". The presbytery was under no illusions that it would be a simple task to split the parish of Jura and Colonsay. Nevertheless, the report was sent to Nicol Spence in Edinburgh, and also recommended to the Lords for Plantation of Churches. But no further steps were taken. The minutes of the Commission of the Church of Scotland for 11 March 1725 explain why. The presbytery had in fact been either misinformed or too optimistic about the local heretors. A number of requests had been received to erect new parishes: Gigha, Jura and Colonsay, Coll and Tiree, and others. Although the local landowners had been asked to appear:
But the consent of some Heretors not being as yet obtain’d, And they being Members of Parliament, and not in Scotland, these processes could not hitherto be insisted in, The Commission renews the former Appointments in thes matters.
Given the political crisis convulsing Scotland at the time, the major landowners had more important things to worry about than creating new parishes in the western Highlands. Nevertheless, as a result of the intervention of the Synod of Argyll, the relationship between the Presbytery of Kintyre and Neil Campbell was transformed.
The report of 1726
On 30 July 1725 the synod recommended their presbyteries to take advantage of the forthcoming Royal Bounty scheme. Government funds were now available in order to sponsor itinerant ministers and catechists who would "fill in the gaps" in the still patchy ecclesiastical framework in the Gàidhealtachd. The synod therefore advised them:
to meet as soon as they can, and draw up a state of their bounds, and send in the same to the Agent for the Church, to be Laid before the Committee appointed by the Assembly for Reformation of the Highlands and Islands of Scotland and for Management of the King’s bounty for that end...
It is very interesting that the synod specifically takes up the case of the parishes under the Presbytery of Kintyre. The Rev. Neil Campbell’s charge heads the list:
the Synod hereby earnestly entreats the said Committee to have a special regaird to the state of the united parishes of Jura and Collonsay and united parishes of Killean Kilchenzie Saddell and Caradell In the Distribution of the Kings bounty.
The presbytery did as they were bidden, and put together another representation on behalf of their colleague. However, this time they were rather tardy: it was not until a year later, at a meeting on 6 August 1726, that the account appears to have been compiled. In forceful, dramatic, even poetic terms, it describes the extreme difficulties the minister faced in carrying out his duties. This is the presbytery’s description of Colonsay. Given that it is apparently more geographically accurate than the 1724 report, one might wonder whether the earlier perambulation had indeed visited the island, or had just relied on the Rev. Neill Campbell’s own estimations. The report states:
That the Island of Collonsay Lyes ffive Leagues and upwards of a very dangerous sea with strong Currents and Confluences of seas off the Gulph of Corivrekane north west of the said Island of Jura which Island of Collonsay is above six Myles In Length and three Myles broad, and by reason of the dangerous seas foresaid The Minister will be for severall weekes stormstayed or windbound before he can have passage from the one Island to the other especially when the wind blowes from the East or Northeast their being no Lands to the West or southwest of the said Island of Collonsay but the open Western ocean In to which the said Minister hes been often In danger of being driven...
Evidently they had had a rough time of the crossing. The representation concludes with a wonderful melodramatic crescendo:
And seing Notwithstanding of the Largeness of this Charge Yet the stipend is very Inconsiderable not exceeding ffyve hundered pounds Scots whereof a good part must of Necessity be expended and Debursd by the Minister in fferying from one Island to another In order to Discharge his Ministeriall ffunction In the said Islands, And That there are no manner of ffree Teinds unaffected within the said Islands or any other ffunds whereby the said stipend can be Augmented (the whole Inhabitants being very poor) And That Lykewayes the Minister hes neither Manse or Gleib Therefore the said Presbyterie of Kintyre Do hereby earnestly Recommend to the said Committee ffor Manadging of his Majesties Bounty That they have Speciall regaird to the Clamant Circumstances of the said parish the Lyke whereof Cannot be paraleal’d In the whole Highlands of Scotland nor perhaps In any part of the Christian world And humbly suppose that such a proportion of his Majesties bounty Cannot be better employed than In provyding ane assistant ffor the service of the said parish
The Presbytery had put together an impressive plea on the Rev. Neil Campbell’s behalf. However, in return they expected the minister of Jura to make amends for his negligent behaviour in the past. Although his colleagues still sympathised with his difficulties, they were no longer prepared to be so lenient as before. Campbell’s usual excuses no longer sufficed:
he being remov’d, the s[ai]d Excuses were Considerd, and the Presy could not but Sympathise with him under his insupportable Grievances in his Charge, but in the mean time could not be satisfied with his Constant Absence And his having the [preaching] Exercise so Long on his hands.
The representation of the state of the parish of Jura and Colonsay, along with requests for an assistant from the united parish of Killean, Kilchenzie and Saddell, was sent to the Synod of Argyll, who forwarded them with a covering letter to the Royal Bounty Committee. The request was duly considered on 12 October 1726, and obviously made an impression:
The Clerk presented a Representation of the Presbytery of Kintyre to the Committee, Shewing that Mr Neil Campbell Minister has under his Charge the Isles of Juray, Collonsay, Scaraba and Lunga, Garvellich, Elachanive and Belnahnay [recte Belnahuay], That Juray is Twenty four miles in length, and Six in Breadth, in which there are two places for publick worship, That Collonsay Lyes five leagues therefrom, and is Six miles in length And three in Breadth, That Scaraba is Three miles in length, and three in Breadth, That Lunga is Two miles in length, And the other Islands abovenamed are also Inhabited, And that there are Strong Currents of Sea Interjected, which makes passage uncertain dangerous and Expensive, And the Minister long detained in some of them, when his presence in the rest is most necessary, And that his Stipend is only about Five hundred pound Scots, and no free Teinds Unaffected in these Islands; and Therefore Craving some Allowance for an Assistant, And this is Recommended by a Letter from the Synod of Argyle dated the Eight day of August last Signed by Mr Dugald Campbell Moderator.
Unfortunately, the Royal Bounty Committee was unable to help. The representations had come in too late in the year. Although they
Do Find the Circumstances of the forsaid Parishes very Clamant, But the forsaid Representations not having been Presented before Distribution of the Kings Bounty after the Late General Assembly, and this years Allowance being already Destinated, and places and Persons having thereby obtained a Right, This Committee cannot make any Alteration therein without the Consent of these concerned, And so Cannot at present Answer the Desire of the forsaid Representations and Letter, And though they had money, can only grant Annual Allowances to Missionaries, But not Settled allowances to Assisstants, And therefore orders that a Letter be wrote to the said Presbytery, Intimating this to them, and Desireing that they may Apply more timously next year.
Evidently, the Synod also requested once more that the parish be split. Once more, however, they ran up against landed interests – in this case "Great" Daniel Campbell of Shawfield, successful tobacco and indeed slave merchant, collector of Customs and financier who had become Member of Parliament for the Glasgow burghs in 1716, after having earlier represented Inveraray. His zeal as a collector made him an unpopular figure in the town. Because of his support for the Malt Tax of 1725, an angry mob ransacked his mansion, Shawfield House, and destroyed its interior. Suspecting the town council of conniving with the rioters, Shawfield called in a loan of £4,500 he had previously made to them. It was doubtless this money, and the £6,080 which the government awarded him as compensation (out of Glasgow council coffers), which enabled him to buy Islay and much of Jura in 1726. Shawfield had already been leasing these estates from the previous owner, John Campbell of Cawdor, since 1723. Although he would soon be a staunch supporter of the church on his estates, at the time of purchase he was evidently rather unwilling, and probably unable, to bear much of the expense of splitting the parish. Indeed, he had to sell Shawfield House in 1727. As appears from the minutes of the Commission of the Church for 8 March of that year, Shawfield withheld his consent.
A catechist for Colonsay at last
Although the committee had no money resting from the 1726 scheme to pay for catechists, in May 1727 they were able to allow £22 sterling "and some odd money" for an itinerant minister to help Campbell in Jura. On 5 August the Presbytery of Kintyre again summoned him to their meeting. If the minister of Jura and Colonsay were to receive official support, if an outsider with an official salary were to work alongside him, then it was absolutely imperative that he be seen to be a worthy recipient, not a disgrace to the presbytery. This time they not only complained about his absences, but also enquired into his administration of the parish. What they found shocked them. Campbell had never administered communion to his parishioners:
To which He answered that he was discouraged from attempting such a Work in regard He found little appearance of the reality of Religion amongst them, and that He has no constitute Eldership in his parish.
Not only was the minister failing in his duties, he was clearly estranged from his flock. Hardly surprisingly, the presbytery registered that it was "very much disatisfied" with their colleague. Campbell, however, must have expected trouble; he had come to the meeting prepared. To prove his commitment to the ongoing evangelizing of his charge:
Mr Neill Campbell brought from the parish of Colonsay Donald MacLean a young man, whom He recommended as qualified for the office of Catechist. He being called in was Examined & approven.
It is likely that this Donald MacLean was the son of John MacLean, who with Donald MacPherson was one of "the two Catechists who have been Lately Imployed in ye Isles of Colonsa and Jura" who complained in August 1703 that they were "not yet payed for yr pains and diligence among ye people of the s[ai]d Isles". We might also suggest that John MacLean was the church officer who delivered the Presbytery of Kintyre’s summons to the recalcitrant Rev. John MacSween, Campbell’s episcopalian predecessor, in 1700. MacLean would not last long at his first stint as catechist. However, he would return to his post, and would be responsible for the education of nearly three generations of Colbhasaich.
