Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, Volume 69, No. 427, May, 1851Various
General
Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, Volume 69, No. 427, May, 1851
Various
England -- Periodicals; Scotland -- Periodicals
charter, and had wished to _change the destination_ of his estates--and
we know that he was a person of no ordinary talents--he would have
omitted taking means for preserving in his own country the evidence of
what he had done?" But, _secondly_, again, the original charter was, in
1702, in Nova Scotia. Now, we have seen that, in 1723, this 'original
charter' was, on the 10th July 1723, in Ireland, in the hands of a Mr
Thomas Conyers, of Carlow, who "permitted" Mr Hovenden "to see it, and
he did most minutely examine the contents:" and on the 20th of that
month, in the same year, the son of the aforesaid Conyers certified
that that charter "had been trusted to his late father, in troublesome
times, by the deceased Mary, Countess of Mount Alexander." At that time
the fifth Earl was living. When, then, did the charter return from
Acadia to Scotland, and go thence to Ireland? According to the letter
of John of Antrim on the map, his grandmother, the first Countess, took
it to Ireland to her son-in-law, Lord Montgomery, to be taken care
of. That son-in-law died in 1670. What did he do with it? Did he send
it to Canada?--and why? What were the three Earls of Stirling about,
that they did not get possession of this document, the very foundation
of their fortunes and honours? It gets, however, to Canada in 1702;
is back again, and in Ireland, at all events, in 1723; and then gets
placed in uncomfortable circumstances, and encounters queer adventures.
It found its way into the hands of the Rev. John Alexander, (John No.
3,) _in the lifetime of the fifth_ Earl of Stirling; and on his death,
in 1743, it gets into the hands of his widow, who took it to Birmingham
when she went to reside there; whence it was stolen, in 1758, by an
emissary of the then claimant of the peerage, William Alexander, who
took it off to America, and either suppressed or destroyed it, the
latest trace of it existing in 1806 or 1812, when it was presumably
destroyed. All this was the original official statement of his case,
by the prisoner himself, in 1829, in the process of "proving the
tenor."[40] _Thirdly_, In 1702, this M. Mallet speaks of the charter as
"an _ancient_ one;" whereas it was then only sixty-three years old--its
date being 1639. _Fourthly_, It having been thus a dead letter for
sixty-three years, owing to the altered ownership of the territories
included in it--they having become the undisputed property of France,
and so continued for half a century afterwards, namely, till General
Wolff's conquest of Quebec in 1760: yet we have a Frenchman, in 1702,
represented as calmly speculating in the year 1702, without anything
to suggest such an idea, on the possibility of the territories being
reconquered from France by the English, and in that event the charter
becoming an object of great interest! _Fifthly_, We have him also
giving himself very particular concern with the _limitations_ and
family destinations of the tenures of the foreign grantees claiming
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account