In a previous post
I quoted an appeal sent on June 25, 1605, by John Graham, Earl of Montrose to the English commissioners:

“Although you have determined to transport certain of my cousins to Newcastle on Saturday night, there to remain in ward, I entreat you to permit Richard Graham, son of Walter of Netherby, to remain with me. I will be answerable for him to the King, to the Council, and to you.“

As I explained in this post, the Grahams of Montrose and Menteith considered the reiver Grahams to be part of their clan. And clearly had contact with them.

The Earl of Montrose’s letter is ambiguous. By ‘remain with me’ does he mean that Richard Graham was with him at that point? Or does he mean ‘let him come and stay with me’?

I suspect it was the latter – unless Richard Graham had dodged the summons to Carlisle, where so many of his kinsmen found themselves locked up soon after arrival.

Richard Graham

For sure, the English commissioners, charged with ‘pacifying’ the long-turbulent border with Scotland, knew Richard Graham.

For just over a month earlier, they had written to their Scottish counterparts about him.

The letter might suggest that the Scottish commissioners, like the Earl of Montrose, were minded to exclude Richard Graham from what amounted to a kind of ‘ethnic cleansing’ of the reiver Grahams from the borders.

Unless it was the English commissioners who’d left him off the list, then changed their minds.

It forms folio 8 in the Pacification of the Borders documents I have been transcribing from their original Jacobean handwriting.

Folio 8

Folio 8 starts with a list of Grahams. As the first is numbered 134, there must be several pages preceding it which were not uploaded to the Reivers website.

As the last is numbered 149, this has to be the list of Grahams who were to be banished to the Cautionary Towns in the Netherlands (see previous post, link above).

It then says that:

‘we perceive that the leaving out of Richard Graham, son to Walter of Netherby is so -ill taken, that we shalbe taxed of partiallitie…

…therefore we have thought good hereby to pray your consent, that his name may be added to the rest as before it was.’

Banished

As my post on Walter Graham of Netherby (link above) says, Richard Graham was deported, firstly to the Netherlands, and later to Ireland.

Here is my transcript of folio 8:

134. Willm Graham, ?servant to Fergie of Medopp

135. Robt Graham of Aykebank, alias ?Xpe Robbe

136 Richard Graham alias linox?

137. Thomas Graham alias Ke—s Tom

138. Edward Graham of Mill

139 Fergus Graham of Mill

140 John Graham alias John of Westlinton

141 Willm Graham son to Robt of Closegapp?

142 Richard, alias Arthur’s Ritchie

143 Robert of the Fauld

144 George of Millhill

145 Richard of Crosshead

146/7/8/9. Willm, Walter, William, Willm Graime – cottingers to Davie of Bankhead

The copy of the ?— sent from the English commissioners to the Scottish, the 17th of April 1605.

It may please your honour to understand that since our departure from your thi-day we

perceive that the leaving out of Richard Graham, son to Walter of Netherby

is so -ill taken, that we shalbe taxed of partiallitie and as yet noone complained of that

we hold not an indifferent course in our proceedings therefore we have thought good

hereby to pray your consent, that his name may be added to the rest as before it was

being a thing? that now as the case stands, we may not in reason do without your

pri-ities. And further where we doubt those names of the Grahams and others already

set down, may not fa-e out to be – men as is fitting, we have thought it best in

discharge of all our duties to have all the particular branches of the Grahams before

us, before we -e-te, and to see them face to face, and by all other the best ways and

means we can, to inform our selves of such as are most fytt to be sent away, not

being done we shall draw upp their names in that pa- we all fyned yst you best

pleased, or else that it be left to us, That praying that be this course, we may under-

stand your mynds therein, we leave you with our hartie commendations, and like thanks

for all your courtesies to the protection of the almightie, Carliel in haste, the 17th of April 1605.

Your honours’ assured ffriends

Wee are given to understand by Sir-

Henry Leigh of a great abuse

offered contrarie to your directions

to one Johne Skelton, where-

we pray you have regard