CHANGES—MR. JAMES CARRUTHERS—MR. ANDREW DAWSON—PROGRESS— KEMPCAIRN—REPAIRS OF THE “HIGHLAND CHAPEL” OPPOSED—PROCEEDED WITH—ANNUAL MEETING OF 1785—MEASURES PROPOSED—THE COLLEGE AT PARIS—ITS GREAT UTILITY—MR. DORLET—DECLINE OF THE COLLEGE— BETTER PROSPECTS—THE BISHOP DISAPPOINTED—THINKS OF RESIGNING—IN BETTER HEALTH CONTINUES HIS LABOURS—RESTORATION OF THE HIGHLAND CHAPEL COMPLETED—THE PARIS COLLEGE—PRINCIPAL GORDON’S “MEMOIR” ANSWERED—A COMPROMISE.

Changes in the missions were necessarily very frequent. Mr. James Cameron, Chaplain at Kirk­connel, was removed to Aberdeen, Mr. Maxwell stipulating that Mr. McGillivray should be sent to supply his place. In compliance, however, with the wishes of Mr. McGillivray’s congrega­tion, the Bishop declined to remove him. Finally, Mr. Maxwell’s influence prevailed in securing the services of Mr. McGillivray as his Chaplain. Mr. James Cameron was appointed to succeed Mr. Fraser, an ex-Jesuit, in the mission of Munshes, in Galloway, the family there being still Catholic, and Mr. John Gordon, nephew of Bishop Geddes, replaced Mr. Cameron at Aberdeen. The mission of Glenlivat fell to Mr. James Carruthers, who had just completed his studies at Douai, and who, in his riper years, was known as the author of a History of Scotland, and a vindication of Queen Mary. Mr. William Reid was removed from Shenval to the Stryla mission, of which Keith was the centre; and Mr. Andrew Dawson, afterwards President at Scalan, commenced his missionary career at Shenval, the chief place of the Cabrach district. Such frequent changes were to none more unpleasant than the Bishop; but they could not be avoided. “Necessity,” he stated, “has now for many years been our only guide in these matters.”

It is indicative of progress that it was appointed for the priest of the Stryla mission to reside at Kempcairn, near Keith, where a chapel and house were to be provided for him. This was not the only missionary establishment that the Bishop was engaged to provide for. He felt the burden; but was resigned. “For my part,” he wrote to his coadjutor, “I think my money cannot be better employed than for such a purpose. But I cannot do all, and hope you will do something, at least for Kempcairn.” Mr. Reid survived the Bishop fourteen years; and in his latter days, which, like his earlier time, were usefully, employed, was known as the “Patriarch.”

It became necessary this year to make repairs in the old chapel on the east side of Blackfriars’ Wynd. The Bishop could not, on account of other demands upon him, contribute anything towards the expense. He recommended, in consequence, that the funds required should be borrowed; and the interest paid out of the proceeds of the bench rents, and the capital by instal­ments from time to time. One of the neighbours opposed the repairs, as had been done in the case of the alterations required at the chapel on the opposite side. Mr. Menzies, the priest, promptly sought legal advice; and in two hours from the time the work was stopped, the Dean of Guild and his council were on the top of the walls, hearing what could be said and shown on either side. He decided in favour of continuing the repairs; and the adverse party threatened an appeal to the court of session. But nothing appears to have been done, as the work was continued without any further interruption. This chapel was known as “St. Andrew’s Chapel;” but it was sometimes also called the “Highland Chapel,” as Mr. Menzies preached in it on Sunday, in Gaelic, to the Highland congregation.

Bishop Hay desired very much that his friend and coadjutor should be present this year, 1785, at the usual annual meeting of the Bishops. Bishop Geddes was by no means disinclined to attend; and lest there should arise any inconvenience in consequence of his absence from Edin­burgh, Abbe Paul Macpherson was appointed to do duty for him there. He informed Bishop Hay that he had several measures to propose for the better management of their common affairs. To this the Bishop made no objections, assuring him that he was at full liberty to propose whatever he thought most conducive to the common good; for he had “nothing more at heart than to see our little community settled upon the most solid footing, that matters may not be exposed to fluctuations and changes, which are always disagreeable and often hurtful.”

The Scotch College at Paris had for some time been a source of difficulty to the Bishops. They never had so much control of it as would have been most beneficial to the mission. For a long time, however, everything proceeded harmoniously, especially during the days when the Innes family were concerned with its management. They always deferred to the wishes of the Bishops; and the College became famous during the prefecture of Thomas Innes, so well known and eminent as an author and antiquary. The next generation of the Innes family were alike successful in maintaining a good understanding with the heads of the mission in Scotland. From its first institution the Paris College had given valuable aid to the cause of religion in Scotland. It had produced many excellent missionary priests. Its doors were always open to fugitive missionaries, who were so often obliged, when life and liberty were threatened, to leave their country and seek safety abroad. Students on their way to Rome were always kindly entertained at Paris, and as a relief to the Scotch mission the expenses of the remaining part of their journey were defrayed by the superiors of the College at Paris. On their return, likewise, they were welcome guests, and often induced to prolong their stay at Paris until they learned anew their native language and acquired complete knowledge of their future duties. Moreover, the public funds of the college, as well as the private means of its heads, were, time and again, applied for the relief of the pecuniary distress of the mission. They also gave information concerning the difficulties of missionary priests in Scotland, to the early Scotch agents at Rome, who knew little or nothing about such things. They maintained a weekly correspondence with Rome, and apprised the agent there of the miseries of his native country, suggesting, at the same time, reme­dies and stimulating his zeal till they were applied. On the death of Mr. George Innes, in 1752, the last of the Innes family who had relations with the college, the harmony which had so long subsisted between it and the mission began to decline. The new Principal, Mr. John Gordon, of Achintoul, or Dorletters (hence his name often occurs in the correspondence as Mr. Dorlet), was less careful to secure the confidence of the Bishops in his administration. The dissatisfaction of the Bishops arose from the less perfect state of education. The defective training of the young ecclesiastics deprived the mission of many promising students; and it often happened that students, designed for the Church, returned home as laymen and even fell away from their reli­gion. The Bishops remonstrated with the Principal, but to no purpose. On the death of Mr. Gordon, in 1777, hopes were entertained of improvement in the government of the college. His successor, Mr. Alexander Gordon, enjoyed a fair reputation in Scotland, having served the mission for many years, and who was, at the time of his appointment as principal, agent or proc­urator, for the clergy at Edinburgh. He took with him from Scotland, when he went in 1778, to enter on his charge of the college, two of the best students at Scalan. Such beginnings led to the hope that the college would soon renew its ancient reputation, and become, once more, a nursery of serviceable priests. This, however, was not its destiny. The two young men referred to returned home without completing their studies. This was a cause of grief and disappointment to the Bishops; and the revelations made by one of the students, who had returned, were far from affording them any comfort, and only caused further inquiry to be made. One of the two youths when suffering from a severe illness, which ended in his death, spoke his mind to Bishop Hay, personally, and by letter. He assured the Bishop that his loss of health and premature return home arose from the distress of mind caused him by the abuses that had found their way into the college, and to which he ascribed the defection of his fellow-student and others whom he named. Bishop Hay, when at Paris, on his way to Rome, in 1782, inquired more particularly into the management of the college than was to the liking of Mr. Gordon. The quarrelsome temper of the Principal was not unknown. He had given too good proof of it in the protracted dispute which he held with the Bishop concerning the maintenance of his insane brother.

The subject of the college and Bishop Hay’s investigations came before the annual meeting at Scalan in 1783. Vacancies having occurred at the college, the Principal applied for subjects to fill them. Instead of at once complying with this request, the Bishop laid the case of the college before his colleagues. He imparted to them the information which he had received from Mr. Peter Hay, the student, together with the confirmation of the same which he found by personal examination when at Paris. Considering the abuses which prevailed and the persistency of the Principal, he urged on them the extreme measure of declining to send any more boys until the college should be placed in a more satisfactory condition. The other Bishops were greatly swayed by his arguments; but dreading an open rupture, opposed so vigorous a resolution. Their opinion, however, did not prevail, and the Principal was, in due course, advised that he need expect no more students from Scotland until a complete change of system take place in the college. The well-founded fears of Bishops McDonald and Geddes were now realized. The Principal showed that he could retaliate. He met what he called the unjustifiable interference of the Bishops by suspending the funds in Paris belonging to the seminary at Scalan, pretending that their object was the maintenance of boys while preparing for the college at Paris. It appears that there were funds belonging to the mission in his hands, which, on similar grounds, he also sequestrated. The singular talent of Bishop Geddes for making peace was zealously employed but in vain; the Principal remained unmoved, impervious to reason.

The authority of the Prior of the Carthusians over the college was superior to that of the Prin­cipal. To him, therefore, the Bishop appealed against Mr. Gordon’s measure of retaliation. This appeal was written in French, and dated January 27th, 1784. The whole subject was treated therein with the Bishop’s usual method and completeness. Some of his arguments may have been weak and defective, but his reasoning, on the whole, was sound and his cause just. The appeal was sent under cover to the Nuncio at Brussels, and along with it a request that the Nuncio at Paris would deliver it to the Prior with his own hand. This was done. The Prior, de Nonant, was wholly on the side of the Principal, and returned to the appeal a brief and supercil­ious reply, repeating and defending his determination to arrest the funds in Paris that belonged to the seminary, as long as the Scotch Bishops refused to send students to the college. The Bishops were not of a mind to recede from their position. “It is better,” said Bishop Hay, “to send none (no students) there than to send and have them ruined.” The Bishop ably rebutted the Prior’s arguments, and insisted on the conclusion of his appeal. Bishop Geddes also, as procu­rator of the mission, wrote to Paris protesting against attaching the funds of the mission in a cause wholly foreign to their objects and destination. By his courteous manner and wonderful skill in negotiation, he prevailed so far as to effect a compromise in regard to the matter of funds, until the principal question at issue should be decided. The Principal himself was pleased to write a pamphlet, dated April 20, 1785, and had it edited in London by Dr. Alex. Geddes. It was read and discussed at great length in presence of the Bishops and administrators at their annual meeting of 1785. “It was such a paper,” Bishop Hay stated, writing to Mr. Thomson, “as might be expected from such a source—full of misrepresentation, falsehood and acrimony.” The Bishops at this meeting resolved on a proposal to the effect that if the Paris College wanted boys, it must choose them and pay for their board at Scalan, as well as for their outfit and trav­elling expenses on leaving it. The persistent Principal not only put his pamphlet in circulation through the London press, but also talked loudly of carrying the cause to Rome, unless the Bishop would retract his charges against himself and his college. The Bishop, in reply, said he was welcome to write to Rome, and that his opponent would willingly meet him there. More­over, he would not refuse to retract or apologize for any misrepresentation which he might inad­vertently have made, on his becoming aware of it; but he would never think of acknowledging the false interpretation that had been put upon his words.

The Bishop was now suffering in mind from the opposition and ill success which he had met with. The failure of his negotiations regarding the Colleges at Paris and Rome gave him great concern. The resistance to his wishes at the annual meeting which had just been held; the dislike of some of the clergy to his episcopal rule, together with the abuse which they heaped upon him, weighed heavily on his mind. All this, with his ceaseless labour, caused depression of spirits, and to such a degree that he desired to resign his high and laborious charge. Nothing came of this, however. After considerable discussion with his coadjutor and other friends, who were all opposed to his resignation, the idea was abandoned, and the comparative ease which, the meeting and its tares being at an end, he enjoyed, favouring his health, he continued his labours with the usual zeal and energy; while the desire of resignation, once dismissed from his mind, these labours were persevered in for the long period of twenty years that still lay before him, and, with a degree of courage that no trial or hardship or anxiety could overcome.

In the autumn of this year, 1785, the restoration of the chapel on the east side of Blackfriars’ Wynd, popularly known as “the Highland Chapel,” was completed. The expense, considering the circumstances of the mission, was considerable. The pecuniary sacrifice, however, was not made in vain; for, notwithstanding the unfavourable situation, the restored chapel was a source of great benefit to the Catholic community. It was looked upon, at the time, as one of the best chapels in the kingdom; and it is noteworthy that it possessed a fine painting by an eminent artist, and that it was coeval with some of the structures that are still the pride of Edinburgh; while marking the prosperity of that day, the new University was in prospect, and the “North New Town” had advanced westwards, almost opposite the castle.

It was now judged necessary that an answer should be given to Principal Gordon’s “Memoir” regarding the College at Paris. It was, indeed, nothing better than a scurrilous libel—a series of misrepresentations and calumnies from beginning to end. Nevertheless, as it was sent under seal to every priest in both divisions of the mission, it was calculated to create an unfavourable impression unless a true statement of the whole case were prepared and placed in the hands of the clergy. The Bishop, accordingly, drew up a paper in the form of a letter addressed to his “Brethren of the Missions of Scotland,” in which he gave a full and distinct account of every­thing connected with the affair of the college, accompanied by such vouchers for all he advanced as would stand the strictest examination. This paper when shown to the clergy produced the desired result. They were all satisfied as to the falsehood of the Principal’s asser­tions, and so thoroughly disgusted with the insolence of his language as to render it unnecessary to do anything more in the matter. The compromise which Bishop Geddes had succeeded in effecting with the Principal regarding the Scalan and Deeside rents, was confirmed and made permanent, Mr. Gordon agreeing to continue the payment of them as a gift of his good will.