Col. Sir Robert Munro, XXIV of Foulis, 6th Baronet

Notes:

Sir Robert Munro was 24th Baron and 6th Baronet of Foulis. He was a gentleman of calm wisdom, determined courage, and unassuming piety. He was sincere in his friendship and full of compassion even to the lowest of those around him.

At an early age, Sir Robert highly distinguished himself during his education at the Edinburgh University. Upon leaving college, he at once entered the army as a Captain in the Earl of Orkney's Regiment.

In 1705, when only 21 years old, he went to Flanders, where he served for seven years with distinction as a Captain in the Royal Scots under the famous Duke of Marlborough. The Colonel of his regiment was Lord Semple, but he was generally absent and so during the war, the regiment was run mostly by Sir Robert. The manner in which he handled this great responsibility is an honor to his memory.

He had an intense influence over the men in the regiment and a high sense of honor pervaded them all. A letter was written from the Elector-Palatine to his envoy in London, asking him to thank the King of Great Britain for the exellent behavior of the Highland regiment while in his territories, "which was owing to the care of Sir Robert Munro, their Lieutenant-Colonel, for whose sake he would for the future always esteem a Scotchman."

During this period of time, he formed a very close friendship with the well known Colonel James Gardiner, who was then a Cornet of Dragoons. This friendship lasted until death ended it.

After the peace of 1712, Captain Munro returned to Scotland. In 1710, he had been elected member of Parliament for the Wick Burghs, a position which he held continuously until 1741.

While sojourning in England after his return from Flanders in 1712, Sir Robert was introduced to Mary Seymour. The gallant young soldier was smitten by her, and had the happiness of perceiving that he had succeeded in at least attracting her notice. The introduction soon resulted in mutual friendship which ripened into mutal attachment of no ordinary warmth and delicacy. Before Sir Robert left England for the North, he arranged with Miss Seymour a plan of regular correspondence, and wrote to her as soon as he arrived at Foulis.

After waiting with the usual impatience of a lover for a reply which did not come, he sent off a second letter, complaining of her neglect, which had no better success than the first. Shortly afterwards, he sent a third which also failed to elicit a response.

The inference seemed too obvious to be misunderstood, and he strove to forget the lady. He hunted, fished, visited his friends, and engaged in numerous and varied concerns, but to no purpose. She still filled his mind.

After a few months, he returned to England, a very unhappy man. When waiting on a friend in London, he was unexpectedly ushered into the midst of a fashionable party, and to his surprise found himself in the immediate presence of his lady love. She seemed much startled by his appearance and blushed deeply, but suppressing her emotion, she turned to the lady who sat next to her, and began to converse on some common topic of the day.

Sir Robert retired, beckoned to his friend, and begged him to procure an interview with the lady, which he did. She said that she had not received a single letter, and believed that Sir Robert had lost interest in her. She had tried to forget him but had been as unsuccessful as Sir Robert had. They both were very relieved to find that there was still a strong emotional bond between them and they parted more attached than ever. Less than two months later, Mary Seymour became Lady Munro of Foulis.

Sir Robert succeeded in tracing all his letters to one point--a kind of post-office on the border of Inverness-shire. There was a proprietor in the neighborhood who was deeply engaged in the interests of the Stuarts, and directly hostile to Sir Robert. There was little difficulty in ascertaining what had happened to the letters. Sir Robert was satisfied at having solved the mystery and, true to his nature, exacted no revenge.

After the failure of the Rising of 1715, the guilty proprietor was among those who were proscribed for taking part in the rebellion. Sir Robert's influence with the Government, and the office to which he was appointed, gave him great power over the confiscated proprietors, and this power he exerted to its utmost in behalf of the wife and children of the proprietor. "Tell your husband," he said to the lady, "that I have now repaid him for the interest he took in my correspondence with Miss Seymour."

Since his father was blind, Robert no doubt took a leading part in putting into action his father's anti-Jacobite policies during the rising of 1715. In Nov 1715, Robert, younger of Foulis, was appointed Governor of Inverness. In 1716, he was appointed a Commissioner of Inquiry into the forfited estates of the attainted Highland Chiefs. In this office he was able to procure a number of parishes to be erected through the rebel countries and provide them with suitable stipends out of the confiscated lands, so that Protestantism began to be preached in lands where it had not been known before.

At that time, the retiring Councilors of a Royal burgh elected their successors in office, usually themselves, and the right of electing members of Parliament was largely vested in the various Town Councils. The composition of the Council, therefore, was all important to Parliamentary candidates such as Sir Robert.

During the 1721 municipal election in Dingwall, Sir Robert took some unusual steps to ensure that the majority of the Council favored him. There are several versions of this story, but Sir Robert and his brother, Captain George Munro, appears to have kidnapped some of the opposing Councilors just before the election so they were not able to vote against him. The Munro claim was that the Councilors owed money and were being apprehended for that reason, but the timing of their arrest was such that they were not able to cast their votes in the municipal election.

Like his father, Sir Robert was an elder in Kiltearn Parish Church and discharged the duties connected with that office with characteristic conscientiousness and consistency.

During his long Parliamentary career of more than thirty years, he distinguished himself as a consistent friend of the people and his Sovereign, and a stout upholder of the religion and liberty of his country.

In 1740, when Scotland was on the eve of what he deemed a just war, even though he was then 56 years of age, he resigned from Parliament to accept a commission as Lieutenant-Colonel in the 42nd Royal Highlanders, the Black Watch. This is the same position he held when the Black Watch was first organized in 1729.

On 9 May 1745, his regiment was among the first on the field at the battle of Fontenoy and he surprised the whole army by a display of extraordinary yet admirable tactics directed with the most invincible courage against the enemy. From the main battery of the French, which he was ordered to attack, he dislodged a force far superior to his own, and found a strong body of the enemy stationed beyond it preparing to open upon him a sweeping fire. He commanded his men to prostrate themselves to avoid the shot, which accordingly swept harmlessly over them. Then, when the French were in the act of reloading, the Highlanders suddenly sprang up, poured in their own fire, slung their muskets, and, under cover of the smoke, they charged with targe and claymore with such force that they quickly cut their way through the French lines.

Then retreating for a little, according to the tactics of their country, he again brought his men to the charge, and with a similar maneuver of alternate attack and retreat, which was frequently repeated during the day, committed great havoc upon the French army. Sir Robert was everywhere with his regiment even though he was so fat that when he was in the trenches, he had to be hauled out by the arms and legs by his own men. He also was unable to prostrate himself just as the enemy raised their pieces for firing. He stood alone with the colors behind him exposed to the volley. His preservation that day was the surprise and astonishment not only of the army, but of all who heard about it.

At one point, Sir Robert was ordered to silence a French battery which was annoying the allied army. The Black Watch Regiment immediately drove away the French and spiked their cannon, but then soon found themselves surrounded by three regiments of French cavalry. Seeing their dangerous position, Sir Robert shouted to his troops, "Now, my lads, mind the honor of your country." The regiment immediately assumed a determined "lion-like" posture and cut their way through the enemy, suffering severely in the action.

When the battle had become general, the British began to give way before the numerically superior forces of the enemy and Sir Robert's regiment formed the rear guard of the retreating army, because they were the only regiment that could be kept to their duty. A strong body of French horse came galloping up behind, but when within a few yards of the Highlanders, they turned on Sir Robert's command and received them with a fire so well directed and so effectual, that nearly one-half of them were dismounted. The rest weeled about and rode off and did not again return to the attack.

At Fontenoy, the Black Watch suffered five officers and thirty men killed, and two sergeants and eighty-six men wounded.

The Duke of Cumberland was so much struck with the conduct of Sir Robert Munro's regiment that he decided to grant them any favor that was in his power to give. The men of the regiment asked for the pardon of one of the soldiers of the regiment who had been court-martialed for allowing a prisoner to escape, and was under sentence of a heavy corporal punishment which they felt would not only disgrace them all, but also their families and their country. The request was immediately granted and the Duke was even more impressed by the nature of the wish.

Even the French could not withold their praise for Sir Robert and his regiment. A French writer says, "The British behaved well, and could not be exceeded in ardor by any but our officers, who animated the troops by their example, when the Highland furies rushed upon us with more violence than ever did a sea driven by a tempest...In short we gained the victory; but may I never see another."

King George I had never seen a Highland soldier and expressed a desire to see one. Three privates were selected from the Black Watch Regiment and sent to London. Gohn Grant, one of the three, died on the journey, but Sir Robert presented the other two, Gregor Macgregor and John Campbell, to the King. They went through their broadsword exercise and showed their skill in handling the Lochaber axe, or lance, before a number of general officers who had assembled for the purpose in the Great Gallery at St. James' Palace. The King was greatly impressed and gave them each a guinea. The soldiers gave their guineas to the porter of the palace gate as they left.

In Oct 1745, Sir Robert's Regiment was ordered home to deal with the Rising. They arrived on the Thames on 4 Nov 1745, and while other regiments were sent to Scotland under General Hawley to assist in quelling the insurrection, Sir Robert's 42nd Regiment was marched to the coast of Kent, where it joined the division of the army there assembled to repel an expected invasion. This was done because more than three hundred men had fathers and brothers engaged in the Rising, and the prudence and humanity of keeping them aloof from a contest between duty and affection is evident. Sir Robert was promoted to Colonel and given command of the 37th Regiment which was ordered to Scotland.

On 17 Jan 1746, Sir Robert's regiment took part in the Battle of Falkirk. His new regiment was deployed on the left wing of the army, but in the moment of attack, it participated in the general panic which had seized the other regiments on the left, and fled, leaving its Colonel surrounded by the enemy, alone and unprotected. In this situation, Sir Robert was attacked by six men of Lochiel's Regiment, and, for some time, gallantly defended himself with his half-pike, but was ultimately overcome and slain.

Sir Harry Munro of Foulis, Robert's heir and successor wrote to Lord President Forbes a few days after the battle saying:

"My Lord,--I think it my duty to acquaint your Lordship of the deplorable situation I am in. The engagement between the King's troops and the Highlanders on Thursday last, within a mile of Falkirk, proves to me a series of woe. There both my dear father and uncle Obsdale were slain. The last, your Lordship knows, had no particular business to go to the action, but out of a most tender love and concern for his brother, could not be dissuaded from attending him, to give assistance if need required. My father, after being deserted, was attacked by six of Lochiel's regiment, and for some time defended himself with his half pike. Two of the six, I am informed, he killed, a seventh coming up fired a pistol into my father's groin, upon which, falling, the Highlander with his sword gave him two strokes in the face, one over the eyes and another on the mouth, which instantly ended a brave man. The same Highlander fired another pistol into my uncle's breast, and with his sword terribly slashed him, whom he killed. He then despatched a servant of my father's. That thus my dearest father and uncle perished, I am informed, and this information I can depend on, as it comes from some who were eye-witnesses to it. My father's corpse was honourably interred in the Church-yard of Falkirk by direction of the Earl of Cromarty and the Macdonalds, and all the Chiefs attended his funeral. Sir Robert was the only body on the field on our side that was taken care of. Now, my Lord, you may easily conceive, all circumstances duly weighed, how dismal my situation is. I depend on your advice and assistance."

Sir Harry erected a large and elaborately ornamented sarcophagus over his father's grave. The English translation of the Latin inscription reads:

"Here lies what is mortal of Sir Robert Munro, Baronet of Fowlis, Chief of his clan. An officer in the army whose life was honourably spent in the field and in the British Parlia- ment for the Liberty and Religion of his native country. He died most gloriously on the Battlefield near Falkirk, 17th January, 1746, in the 62nd year of his age, renowned for his virtue and counsel. He commanded the Highland Regiment which will be remembered as long as the battle of Fontenoy. Let us ever desire to continue friendship and fidelity from friends, kindness and clemency to foes, goodwill and goodness to all even to enemies."

During his distinguished military career, Sir Robert fought at many battles including Dettingen, Fontenoy, Culloden, Quebec, and he was killed at Falkirk.

References:

(1) "The Munro Tree (1734)" by R. W. Munro - Edinburgh (1978) - Z

(2) "History of the Munros of Fowlis" by A. Mackenzie - Inverness (1898) - p.
117-138

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Buried:
Falkirk Church Yard

Robert married Mary Seymour in , , , England. Mary (daughter of Henry Seymour) was born about 1686; died on 24 May 1732. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

Error alert: Some references say Anne married Rev. William Mercer, a Presbyterian minister of Aberdeenshire, the parents of Gen. Hugh Mercer.

Ref: Clan Munro files - Patton, David Wilson
"The Highlander" - Jul/Aug 88 - p. 38

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Notes:

George served in the Royal Navy.

Ref: "The Munro Tree (1734)" by R. W. Munro - Z/2

George Munro his 2d son.

George in Royal Navy d 1743 (Douglas 86).

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 138

3. George, an officer in the Royal Navy, who died unmarried in 1743.

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Notes:

Ref: "The Munro Tree (1734)" by R. W. Munro - Z/3

"Mrs Elizabeth Munro his [Sir Robert Munro's] daughter."

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 138

4. Elizabeth, who died in infancy.

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Notes:

1. Robert, who died in infancy.

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 138

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Notes:

**********
(The following is from the "Clan Munro Magazine" - NO. 26, 2012 - "Sir Charles Munro - The Ninth Baronet" - by Hector Munro of Foulis)

«i»It was well known in Ross-shire and beyond that in 1776 Sir Harry Munro of Foulis, 7th Baronet, after gathering in much (an estimated 36,000 acres) of the ancient Munro lands previously conveyed or leased out under the old system of wadsets and tacks, had drawn up a Deed of Entail, not only detailing who exactly was to succeed to Foulis and in what order of precedence"...For support and continuance of my family and name..." commencing with his own sons Hugh and George and lawful, (i.e. legitimate) heirs male of their bodies, whom failing (lawful) heirs female etc. This was followed by a list of the male members of the leading Munro cadet families, starting with Culcairn and follwed by Culrain, Novar, Fyrish, Achany, Teaninich and Auchenbowie, whom failing the females of the same, but also severely restricting heirs and successors from selling or burdening the Estate with debt.
«/i»**********

Harry (or Henry) was educated in Dr. Philip Doddridge's famous academy at Northampton. In 1737, his tutor there was the Rev. Gilbert Robertson, who later became the minister of Kincardine. His classical learning was started at Westminster School and completed at the University of Leiden in Holland, which had long been used by Scottish students and scholars. Sir Harry was known as the Scholar Chief.

In 1746, Sir Harry Munro succeeded his father and became 25th Baron and 7th Baronet of Foulis.

He served as a Member of Parliament uninterruptedly from 1746 to 1761, first for Ross-shire (1746-1747) and then for the Wick Burghs (1747-1761).

He built the present Foulis Castle in the Dutch mode to replace the older castle which burned in 1750. The old castle was described in an old Gaelic poem as "castle gaunt-peaked, the eagle's nest".

On 13 Jan 1758, he married Anne Rose, the daughter of Hugh Rose of Kilravock by his second wife, Jane (Rose).

On 28 Jun 1776, he entailed all his estates by a deed signed at Ardullie on that date. This entail was in favor of certain female as well as male heirs, and therefore was responsible for much litigation and expenditure at a later period in the history of the family.

For nearly thirty years he devoted his leisure hours to a critical work upon Buchanan's "Psalms of David," which he finished and left ready for the press at his death. During his lifetime he submitted the manuscript to the examination of Thomas Ruddiman, whose reputation as a Latinist and careful editor of Buchanan's "Opera Omnia," then stood high in Scotland. Ruddiman was very well pleased with it, highly praised it, and paid the handsomest compliments to Sir Harry's classical knowledge and critical ability, as shown by a letter of several pages long that he wrote. From this it is apparent that Sir Harry was entitled to the reputation which he had for distinguished attainments in Latin literature.

He died on 12 Jun 1781, at Edinburgh, where he had gone for the benefit of his health. He was interred in Grey Friar's church-yard, about thirty yards southwest of the church, and contiguous to the burying-ground of the Monros of Achenbowie. Sixty-seven years afterwards, his grand-daughter, Mary Seymour Munro of Fowlis, erected a tombstone to his memory with the following inscription:

"SIR HARRY MUNRO, BART. 1848. This tablet is placed here by Mary Seymour Munro of Fowlis, as a tribute of respect to the memory of her grandfather, Sir Harry Munro, Baronet. who died in Edinburgh on the 12th of June, 1781, and was buried here."

He was succeeded by his second and elder surviving son, Hugh Munro.

**********
«i»Foulis Castle ... was accidently burned down in 1750 after having been garrisoned for the government and suffering at the hands of the Jacobites in two uprisings. It was completely rebuilt by Sir harry Munro, 7th Baronet. The term "castle" is used in the sense of "chateau" and the structure itself was called "a mighty fine house" by a visitor in 1762. It does boast a four-story tower and was the first house in county Ross to be assisted financially on the recommendation of the Historic Buildings Council for Scotland. «/i»

(The Monroe Book - by J. S. Guilford)
**********


Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Buried:
Grey Friar's church-yard

Harry married Anne Rose on 13 Jan 1758. Anne was born est 1722; and died. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 146

4. Jane, who died at Fowlis Castle, unmattied, in 1771, aged 18 years.

Notes:

Hugh was born 25 Oct 1763. In 1781, when he was eighteen years of age, he succeeded his father and became the 26th Baron and 8th Baronet of Foulis.

Shortly after his father's death, he went to London, where he lived for many years. In Nov 1794, he "entered into an irregular union" with Jane Law, who was the daughter of Alexander Law. Alexander was a native of the parish of Keithhall in Aberdeenshire and served as chef to King George III. Hugh and Jane had an illegitimate daughter, Mary Seymour Munro, who was born in London on 14 May 1796.

Sir Hugh and Jane later married in London on 24 Sep 1801, as shown by the following affidavit:

"23rd Sept., 1801.--Appeared personally Sir Hugh Munro, Baronet, and made oath that he is of the parish of Saint Mary-le-bone, in the county of Middlesex, a bachelor aged twenty-one years and upwards; and intendeth to marry with Jane Law, of the same parish, a spinster likewise aged twenty-one years and upwards; and that he knoweth of no lawful impediment by reason of any pre-contract, consanguinity, affinity, or any other lawful means whatever, to hinder the said intended marriage, and prayed a license to solemnise the same in the parish church of Saint Mary-le-bone aforesaid; and further make oath that the usual place of abode of him, the said Sir Hugh Munro, was and hath been in the said parish of Saint Mary-le-bone for the space of four weeks last past. (Signed) "H. MUNRO.

"Sworn before me, N. Parson, Sur."

"Sir Hugh Munro Baronet of this parish, batchelor, and Jane Law of the same parish, and spinster, were married in this church by license, this 21st day of September, in the year 1801, by me "BENJN. LAWRENCE, Curate.

"This marriage was solemnised between us H. MUNRO. JANE LAW. In the presence of THOS. BIRD. JOHN WILLOCK."

Shortly after their marriage Sir Hugh Munro and his new wife took up their residence at Foulis Castle. On 1 (or 3) Aug 1803, Jane tragically drowned while swimming in the Cromarty Firth. She was 27 years old. Hugh and Jane had no other children besides Mary Seymour Munro, but Sir Hugh did have a natural son, George.

It was soon realized that because of the entail that Hugh's father, Sir Harry, had made, that Mary Seymour Munro would inherit the estate of Foulis, but that the title would go to Hugh's closest male heir. If Mary should marry and leave heirs, then the separation of the estate and title would be complete, leaving the head of the house of Foulis and Chief of the clan practically landless. This was all dependent on recognizing Mary Seymour, who was born out of wedlock, as Hugh's legitimate heir since Hugh had later married Mary's mother, Jane. If the marriage had taken place in Scotland, there would have been no grounds for dispute, but since it was performed in England interested persons began spreading stories to the effect that Mary Seymour Munro was not the legitimate heir to the estate of Foulis.

On 27 May 1831, Mary started a lawsuit against her father, and all of the possible heirs of Foulis in order to clarify her right to inherit the estate. Although Sir Hugh was named as a defendant in the action, it is not clear on which side of this issue he stood. The Mackenzie reference says on p. 150 that Sir Hugh was "nominally one of the defenders, but [was] the lady's father and the real pursuer himself." But later on p. 153 it says that because the courts ruled that Mary was entitled to inherit the estate of Foulis, Sir Hugh "gave orders for dismantling it. The furniture of the castle was sold, and all the beautiful timber around the castle and throughout the estates was cut down, and the lands as well as the duties of the proprietor were left for many years to the administration of factors."

Mr. Joseph Mitchell, C.E., Inverness laments the loss of the forests around Foulis by writing that "The trees around this ancient seat were of great age and magnificent size. Nature seemed to have planted them in most picturesque grouping. One chestnut of vast dimensions in front of Ardullie house would, it was said, when in full foliage, shelter 1000 men under its branches... Succeeding generations, however, will lose the charm which groups of antique and venerable trees afforded to the lover of the picturesque in this locality."

Mary Seymour's victory was a hollow one because she found her estate dismantled of its beauties and even in that condition she did not long enjoy it. She intended to make Foulis her permanent residence when her father died in 1848, but she died on 12 Jan 1849 before she could move there. She was unmarried and so, after all, the Foulis estates reverted to Sir Hugh's nearest male heir along with the titles.

Sir Hugh lived for many years at his town residence, 22 Manchester Square, London, where he died on 2 May 1848, at the age of 85. His remains were brought to Ross-shire, and interred at Kiltearn in the family burying-ground of his ancestors.

On his death without legitimate male issue, all the descendants in the male line of Robert, 24th Baron and 3rd Baronet of Foulis, became extinct. The titles, and after his daughter's death in the following year, the estates, reverted to his nearest male heir, Charles Munro, eldest son of George Munro of Culcairn and Culrain.

References: (1) "History of the Munros of Fowlis" by A. Mackenzie - Inverness (1898) - p.
146-155

**********
The following is a transcription of RW "Billy" Munro's genealogy notes:

[Alexander Munro] «i»son of William Munro, tacksman of Delnies (d. 1778) & Margaret Spens (d. 1750); 'preacher of the Gospel', d. 22 June 1777; tutor to Sir Hugh Munro of Foulis (1763-1848) when a boy at Foulis for two or three years; went with Sir Harry & son Hugh to Edinburgh & remained with them till he was taken ill, when he was sent back to Ross-shire by Sir Harry & died 'early in harvest' 1777; prob. the 'Mr. Alexander Munro student of Divinity at Arduilzie' named in Dingwall Presby 28 Feb & 10 July 1776, witnessed the Foulis entail 28 June 1776, & perhaps the 'preacher of the Gospel' who d. 22 June 1777.

Alness Monument Inscription; Foulis Case v 55; Reg. of Tailzies vol 21 fol 218; Presbytery of Dingwall Minutes, vol 8, pp. 28,34 (NAS ref CH 2/92/8).
«/i»**********
**********
The following is a transcription of RW Munro's genealogy notes:

[Alexander Munro] «i»tacksman of Culnaskeath; with son Robert had tack of town & lands of Culnaskeath for 19 years from Whitsunday 1794 from Sir Hugh Munro of Foulis.

Foulis Case vi 48
«/i»**********

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Died:
22 Manchester Square, London, England

Buried:
Kiltearn church-yard

Family/Spouse: Unknown. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Hugh married Jane Law on 21 Sep 1801 in St. Mary-Le-Bone, London, Middlesex, England. Jane was born about 1776; died on 1 Aug 1803 in , , , Scotland. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

Ref: Clan Munro files - Stroud, Anna Margaret

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 144-146

"To me the said Sir Harry Munro myself, whom failing, to Hugh Munro my eldest lawful son and the heirs male of his body, whom failing, to George Munro my second lawful son, and the heirs male of his body..."

3. George, who went to the West Indies, where he died unmarried. The following notice of his death appears in the Sunday Reporter of the 11th July, 1802--"April 22, at Kingston, Jamaica, of fifty-eight hours' sickness of the putrid fever, George Munro, Esq., of the Custom-house there, and second son of the late Sir Harry Munro of Fowlis, Baronet."

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Notes:

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 145

1. Robert, who died in infancy.

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Notes:

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 146

5. Seymour, who died in infancy.

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Notes:

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 154

Sir Hugh had a natural son, George, to whom his sister Mary Seymour Munro bequeathed the property of Milntown. He, on his death, left it in trust to the Corporation of Perth, who obtained authority from Parliament to sell it to William Matheson, farmer of Newton, parish of Kiltearn, for the sum of 7000 pounds. Mr Matheson a few years ago sold Milntown to Major Jackson of Swordale. It pays a feu duty of 4 pounds 10 shillings 0 pents to Sir Hector Munro of Fowlis, the superior of the lands. George on his death was interred in the same grave as his half-sister, Mary Seymour Munro. Nearly all the family papers, and Sir Harry's valuable manuscripts, were removed by this George to his sister's residence at Perry-Hill, Sydenham, and were there wontonly destroyed.

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA

Notes:

Ref: "History of the Munros" by A. Mackenzie - p. 148

Mary Seymour Munro, born in London on the 14th of May, 1796. Her education was conducted by the Countess of St. Aubin, a French lady of high rank, and by Dr Gordon, the well-known Principal of the Scotch College at Paris. A great lawsuit to test the legitimacy of her birth and her right of succession to the estates, in which she was ultimately successful, was raised and continued for several years.

Naturally enough doubts were entertained in many quarters regarding the legitimacy of Mary Seymour Munro, in view of the facts and circumstances just stated, especially among those whose rights of succession to the estates of Fowlis would be seriously imperilled, should her legitimate birth be established. The Baronetcy, which in the absence of heirs male by Sir Hugh, would go to George Munro of Culrain, now that the male line of Culcairn had become extinct, was not in question, but if the effect of the marriage of her parents, after her birth in England, should be to legitimatise the daughter Mary Seymour Munro, the title and estates would be separated, the Baronetcy going to George Munro of Culrain or his heirs, while the lands of Fowlis, in terms of Sir Harry Munro's entail, would go to Sir Hugh's daughter. This was a serious matter to the Culrains, for if Mary Seymour Munro should marry and leave issue the separation of the title and estates would be complete, leaving the head of the house of Fowlis and Chief of the clan practically landless. It can therefore be readily believed that interested persons were spreading reports to the effect that Mary Seymour Munro was not of legitimate birth, and that the marriage of her father and mother several years after her birth in England could not have the same effect as a similar marriage in like circumstances in Scotland would admittedly have had in legitimatising the birth of children previously born out of wedlock.

It therefore became necessary, if Sir Hugh's daughter, born out of wedlock in England, was to succeed him in the Fowlis estates, that steps should be taken to establish her legitimacy, and it was naturally felt by herself and friends that this could be done much easier during the life and with the concurrence and assistance of her father than after his death.

For this purpose a summons of declarator and legitimacy in the Court of Session was issued on the 27th of May, 1831, at the instance of the lady herself, Mary Seymour Munro, described as the daughter and only lawful child of Sir Hugh Munro of Fowlis, Baronet, and of the now deceased Dame Jane Law or Munro, his spouse, against the said Sir Hugh Munro her father, George Munro, "late of Culrain, presently residing in London, or elsewhere, furth of Scotland, Charles and John, his sons, also residing in London"; and John, Colin, and the other sons of Charles; and George Frederick, grandson of the said George Munro, late of Culrain, and all those who had a right to succeed the one after the other in terms of Sir Harry's entail. She claims the right to succeed her father Sir Hugh, as next heir of entail and his only lawful child, "notwithstanding, whereof certain persons, interested by themselves or their kindred or connexions in the succession to the said estate, have maliciously and unjustifiably spread reports tending to that effect, injure, or destroy the jus crediti and vested right of succession competent to the pursuer in virtue of the destination and clauses and limitations, prohibitory, irritant, and resolutive contained in the said entail and by falsely and calumniously denying the right and title of the pursurer to said estate, in the character of lawful daughter and only child in life of said Sir Hugh Munro of Fowlis or otherwise," and prays the Court that "it ought and should be found, declared, and descerned by our said Lords, that the deceased Dame Jane Law, the mother of the pursuer, was the lawful wife of the said Sir Hugh Munro, defender; that she cohabited with him as such during several years, residing with her said husband at his hereditary mansion-house of Fowlis, in the county of Ross, in Scotland, where she was fully acknowledged by him and by the whole neighbourhood, and by all their friends and acquaintances and visitors, as holding lawfully the style and title of Lady Munro, and was in all respects, habit and repute, the wife of the defender, the said Sir Hugh Munro, the father of the pursuer, who was reared, brought up, and acknowledged and educated by him and his said wife as their lawful child, and presented as such to all their friends, relations, and connections, and held out in that character to the public at large," and further, it should be declared that she, as the daughter and only lawful child of her father Sir Hugh, failing him, and any heirs male of his body, is entitled to succeed to the estates of Fowlis and others, in virtue of the clause of destination and other clauses in the entail, and that all the defenders, being the other substitutes in the same deed should be prohibited, interdicted, put to silence and forbidden in all time coming, to dispute or deny judicially or extra-judicially her legal right of succession as the only lawful child of her father.

Defences were duly lodged, and as a matter of course Sir Hugh, nominally one of the defenders, but the lady's father and the real pursuer himself, "admits the truth of the statements contained in the libel and the inferences deducted from them" and that its conclusions were well founded. He then proceeds with a long narrative, admitting that his daughter was born five years before he married her mother, and detailing many of the facts and circumstances connected with their unmarried and married life in London, but maintaining that he never gave up his Scottish domicile, and that consequently his marriage to the mother after the birth of the daughter, although in England, had the same effect in legalising her birth as if they had resided all the time in Scotland, where that would be the unquestioned result of the Scottish marriage laws.

Nor was the slightest doubt cast upon his daughter's legitimacy, he goes on to say, "until 1816, when the next heir of entail, Mr Munro of Culcairn, to the amazement of the defender, ventured to propagate a most malicious report that the pursuer is not the lawful daughter of the defender. The unworthy motives of Culcairn did not permit him to discriminate as to the effect of a legitimation subsequente matrimonio. His calumny had for its object to cast into doubt the paternity of the pursuer, for which most scandalous imputation he never was able to assign the slightest reason; and, in truth, he made no defence of the infamous charge invented by him, when he was regularly challenged for it in a court of law. His conduct occasioned, in the year 1816, the institution of an action against him before the Commissaries of Edinburgh, at the instance of the present pursuer." The conclusion of the summons in that action against Duncan Munro of Culcairn was--inasmuch as the complainer, Mary Seymour Munro, was legitimated by the marriage which took place after her birth between her father and mother, and that she had always been held and reputed to be a lawful child of the said marriage, "therefore it ought and should be found and declared by your decrreet and sentence, that the complainer is the lawful child of the said Sir Hugh Munro, Baronet, and that, as such, she has right to succeed to her said father and her outher relations, in their heritable and moveable subjects,: and that the defender should be found liable in damages for 1000 pounds to the complainer and in the expenses of the action. The proceedings were continued and carried on, more or less actively, for four years, the last notice of this action on the records being an interlocutor, dated the 22nd of December, 1820, in these terms:--

"The Commissaries having considered the memorials and additional memorials for the parties, and resumed consideration of the whole process: In respect the parties are still at variance in regard to several important facts of the case, before further advising, appoint the pursuers"--that is, Sir Hugh and his daughter--"to state, in a special and articulate condescendence, the facts and grounds on which they maintain that the true and proper domicile of Sir Hugh Munro, both at the date of his alleged marriage in England, and subsequently thereto till the dissolution thereof by the death of Lady Munro, was in Scotland. Further, therein to state the precise date of the first acquaintance of Sir Hugh Munro with the deceased Lady Munro, the date of their alleged marriage in England, and also the date of the pursuer, Miss Munro's birth."

Duncan Munro of Culcairn died in that year, 1820, and no more is heard of any proceedings until an action is raised against George Munro of Culrain and the other heirs male of entail, eleven years later, on the 27th of May 1831, although Duncan of Culcairn's son survived until 1821.

The Lord Ordinary, on the 12th of May, 1835, ordered the Culrain case to be reported to the First Division of the Court. On the 12th of January, 1836, the Division took the necessary preliminary steps "for obtaining the opinions of the Second Division, and of the Permanent Lords Ordinary," on the questions argued and to be further argued in the case; and on the 2nd of July following the First Division pronounced the following interlocutor:--

"The Lords having considered the original cases, and additional revised cases in this cause, direct the same to be laid before the Lords of the Second Division, and Lords Ordinary, in order that they may furnish the First Division with their opinion in writing, whether the pursuer is the legitimate daughter of Sir Hugh Munro of Fowlis."

On the 15th of November, 1837, opinions having been returned in terms of the former interlocutor of the First Division, that Court pronounced the following judgment against Mary Seymour Munro's claim to be the legitimate daughter of her father Sir Hugh Munro:--

"The Lords of the First Division having resumed consideration of the pleadings, and whole procedure in the case, and heard counsel, and having also considered the opinions of the consulted judges, in consequence thereof, sustain the defences, assoilzie the defenders from the conclusions of the action, and descern; and find no expenses due to either party."

This judgment of the Court of Session was at once appealed to the House of Lords, by whom it was reversed in 1840, on the ground that Sir Hugh Munro, the pursuer's father, never lost his Scottish domicile, and that therefore his marriage to the mother after the birth of the daughter had the same effect, although performed in England, as if celebrated in Scotland, where the after marriage of the parents admittedly legalises the birth of all children previously born out of wedlock.

Miss Munro, on her father's death in 1848, intended to have taken up her permanent residence at Fowlis Castle, but before she was able to carry her purpose into effect she was removed by death, having died unmarried on the 12th of January, 1849, in the fifty-third year of her age, at her temporary residence of Perry-Hill, Sydenham, county of Kent, and was interred at Norwood, having only survived her father by eight months.

Compiled and edited by Allen Alger, Genealogist, Clan Munro Association, USA