th :i -r; » b; ZL -«¦ I«# cs a; ft .• ' /• c a » ®M*L "(rV \ v~ ,~\ »•' . N \ \ \ \ t V s 0 ,^ / \^ \. i > \O r *• \ \ j X^ ¦\ V \ f :S -" v ,./ ! t MATTHEW BROWN, Ancestry and Descendants COMPILED BY ROBERT SHANNON. 41 BROOKLYN, N. Y. 1900. V ,fl«\* .¦* \ V> \ v,-2> 1: 2*7 During the progress of his labors on the present work, the author has been I fortunate in having the cosperation and assistance ofa number of gentlemen, eminent in history and inliterature, who are now numbered with the dead : MR. JOHN F. MEGINNESS, Williamsport, Pa. ; MR. LEANDER J. McCORMICK, Chicago, 111. ; MR. ANSEL J. McCALL, Bath, N. Y.; REV. JAMES BROWN SCOULLER, D. D., Newville, Pa. Their aid in the work is gratefully remembered, and lotheir memory this volume is reverently inscribed. The author desires especially to return his acknowledgments to the following gentlemen, who have rendered valuable assistance :Rev. James Kerr, D. D., Glas­ gow, Scotland ;Mr. John W. Pritchard, editor of Christian Nation, New York, N. Y. ;Rev. John Brown, Kinclaven, Perthshire, Scotland; John T. Campbell, Esq., Rockville, Ind. ;Mr. A. L. Brown, Eustis, Fla. ;Mr. Charles M. Foresman, Madi­ son, Wis. ;Mr. Gilbert M. McMaster, Coraopolis, Pa. ;and Mr.W. S. Blackwood, Muirkirk, Ayrshire, Scotland. And to his relatives, the descendants of Matthew Brown, upon whose encourage­ ment and coSperation depended the completion of the work, he returns his sincere thanks. GRAVE OF JOHN BROWN, OF PRIESTHILL. INTRODUCTORY. As the progenitor of the Brown Family was a Scotch Cove­ nanter, and as the ancestors of a large proportion of those who by marriage are made subjects of the present work were Scotch and Scotch-Irish, who suffered persecution on account of their religion, it is deemed expedient to recur to events relating to their history. At a time when the public worship of God was conducted in a manner acceptable to the nation, Charles the First determined to force on the Scotch the English Liturgy, or rather a liturgy which, where it differed from that of England, differed, in the judgment of all rigid Protestants, for the worse. This seemed to them a step taken in the mere wantonness of tyranny, and the leading Presbyterian ministers drew up a bond of union or agreement, known as the National Covenant. This Covenanc embraced the Confession of Faith of 1580 and 1581, and was binding on all who signed it to spare no effort which might save the church. The subscribing of the Covenant began Feb­ ruary 28, 1638, and was signed by great numbers of persons of every rank. The General Assembly, which met at Glasgow in November of that year, ratified the Covenant and the Confes­ sion of Faith which it embraced, and deposed the whole of the hierarchy which had been established by the king. The Cove­ nant was also ratified by the Scottish Parliament, June 11, 1640. 5 MATTHEW BROWN, "The first performance of the foreign ceremony produced a riot. The riot rapidly became a revolution, and the whole coun­ try was in arms. An attempt was made to put down the insur­ rection by the sword, but the king's military means ai^d military powers were unequal to the occasion."* In 1642 began the war in England, between the Royalists, or Cavaliers, and Parliament. Because of his continued faith­ lessness and flagrant violation of the laws, Charles the First had been divested of authority. He set up his standard at Notting­ ham, and from his various successes was thought to be gather­ ing sufficient strength to finally re-instate Episcopacy in Scot­ land. With some alarm on this ground, the Scotch willinglyre­ ceived overtures from commissioners deputed from the English parliament. Some hopes were held out to the Scottish nation that in the event of success against the king, the Presbyterian model should succeed the Episcopalian both inEngland and Ire­ land. Approving a measure of this kind, the Scottish Estate's entered into what was called the Solemn League and Covenant with the English Parliament. The Solemn League and Covenant was much more compre­ hensive than the National Covenant. While the latter referred to the observance of the Presbyterian polity within Scotland alone, the former required all who subscribed it to endeavor to bring about a uniformity in religionand church discipline in the three kingdoms. It was ratified by both the English and Scot­ tish Parliaments, by the General Assembly, at Edinburgh, and was subscribed by many of all ranks inEngland and in Scotland. Such were the Covenants for which their adherents, under *Macaulay's History of England. 6 ANCESTRY AND DESCENDANTS. the name of Covenanters, fought and suffered from the restora­ tion of the Stuarts to the close of the revolution of 1688, and during which time, says Wodrow, "Scotland was deluged with the blood of her noblest citizens." Through the success of Cromwell's army religious liberty was exercised in a reasonable degree, but throughout the thir­ teen years of military government the yoke of oppression was otherwise severely felt in Scotland, and from the oppression thus experienced the Restoration was hailed with delight. Though Charles the Second had, previous to his restoration, subscribed both Covenants, and had promised that he would grant liberty of conscience to his subjects, his promises were not fulfilled; and one of the first acts of his English parliament directed that the Covenant should be burned by the hangman, in the Palace Yard;and soon the government resolved to set up a prelatical church inScotland. "Charles the First had tried to force his own religion by his regal power on the Scots at a time when both his religion and regal power were unpopular in England, and he had not only failed but had raised troubles which had cost him his crown and his head. "Now times had changed. Having been compelled, for many years, to yield to the despotism of a military dictator, Eng­ land was zealous for monarchy and prelacy, the people were en­ thusiastic for their king and ready to sustain him in whatever he might attempt. Therefore Charles the Second was free to un­ dertake that which had proved disastrous to his father, without any danger of his .father's fate. "The design was disapproved by every Scotchman whose judgment was entitled torespect. Some Scottish statesmen who 7 MATTHEW BROWN, were zealous for the king's prerogative, though bred Presbyte­ rians and preferring the religion of their childhood, strongly re­ monstrated ;but finding their remonstrance in vain, they had not virtue enough to persist in an opposition that would have given offence to their master, and some of them stooped to the wicked­ ness and baseness of persecuting what in their conscience they believed to be the purest form ofChristianity. "The new church was greatly detested, both as superstitious and foreign; as tainted with the corruptions of Rome, and as a mark of the predominance of England. Disastrous wars and alien domination had tamed the spirits of the people, and there was no general insurrection, and a majority of the people, with many misgivings of conscience, attended the ministrations of Episcopal clergy, or Presbyterian divines who had consented to accept from the government a half toleration, known by the name of Indulgence. "But there were, particularly in the western lowlands, many fierce and resolute men, who held that their obligation toobserve the Covenant was paramount to the obligation to obey the mag­ istrate, maintaining to the last that both Covenants, notwith­ standing the rescissory acts of parliament, were still binding on the whole nation. These people, in defiance of the law, persisted in meeting to worship God after their own fashion. The Indul­ gence they regarded, not as a partial reparation of the wrongs inflicted by the magistrate on the Church, but as a new wrong, the more odious because it was disguised under the appearance of a benefit. Persecution they said could only killthe body, but the black Indulgence was deadly to the soul. "Driven from the towns, they assembled on the heaths and mountains. Attacked by the civil power, they, without scruple, 8 ANCESTRY AND DESCENDANTS. repelled force by force. At every conventicle they assembled in arms. They repeatedly broke out in open rebellion, but being feeble in strength and proscribed by law, they were easily de­ feated and mercilessly punished, but neither defeat nor punish­ ment could subdue their spirit. Hunted down like wild beasts, tortured, imprisoned by the hundreds, hanged by the scores, ex­ posed at one time to the license of the English soldiers, aban­ doned at another time to the mercy of bands of marauders from the highlands, they still stood at bay in a mood so savage that the boldest and mightiest oppressor could not but dread the audacity of their despair. "With the accession of James the Second in 1685 the perse­ cutions against the Nonconformists were conducted with greater vigor than before. The king, in a letter to the Scottish Parlia­ ment, which was read at the opening of the session, called on them in vehement language to provide new penal laws againsl the refractory Presbyterians, and had expressed his regret that his business made it impossible for him to propose such laws in person from the throne. A statute framed by the ministers of the crown was promptly passed, which stands forth, even among the statutes of that unhappy country at that unhappy period, pre­ eminent in atrocity. It was enacted in few but emphatic words, that whoever should preach in a conventicle under a roof, or should attend, either as preacher or hearer, a conventicle in the open air, should be punished with death and confiscation of pro­ perty.