LORD  BYRON  and  his  TIMES
Byron
Documents Biography Criticism
The Creevey Papers
Henry Brougham to Thomas Creevey, 14 September 1820
INTRODUCTION & INDEXES
DOCUMENT INFORMATION
GO TO PAGE NUMBER:
Introduction
Vol. I. Contents
Ch. I: 1793-1804
Ch. II: 1805
Ch. III: 1805
Ch. IV: 1806-08
Ch. V: 1809
Ch. VI: 1810
Ch. VII: 1811
Ch. VIII: 1812
Ch. IX: 1813-14
Ch X: 1814-15
Ch XI: 1815-16
Ch XII: 1817-18
Ch XIII: 1819-20
Vol. II. Contents
Ch I: 1821
Ch. II: 1822
Ch. III: 1823-24
Ch. IV: 1825-26
Ch. V: 1827
Ch. VI: 1827-28
Ch. VII: 1828
Ch. VIII: 1829
Ch. IX: 1830-31
Ch. X: 1832-33
Ch. XI: 1833
Ch. XII: 1834
Ch XIII: 1835-36
Ch XIV: 1837-38
Index
Creative Commons License

Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Produced by CATH
 
“Brougham, 14 Sept., 1820.
“Dear C.,

“. . . Either you or Bennet should by all means ask a question respecting the two late outrages in Scotland committed by Sir Alexr. Gordon and his son Mr. James Gordon. These two worthies being at Crossmichael church one Sunday, and observing the parson, Mr. Jeffrey, pray for the Queen, they caused a vestry (kirk session) to be held instanter; and, there being no further notice, they two and the parson were the only members present; whereupon, by a majority of 2 to 1, they recorded a censure on him and an order against ever again praying for the Queen by name! The Presbytery, being the ordinary ecclesl. jurisdn., immediately took it up, revised the whole proceeding, and have ordered the parties to appear before them—I suppose to be censured.
320 THE CREEVEY PAPERS [Ch XIII.
Again: the son, James Gordon, being Col. of a Yeomanry corps lately on duty, the chaplain, Mr. Gillespie (whom I have known for many years, and who is a man of admirable character and perfect loyalty), preached a very loyal discourse, but prayed for the Q. The Col. put him under arrest! The ecclesl. authorities have taken this matter up, and I suppose (indeed it is quite clear) must take Gillespie’s part strongly. But why do I specify these two matters? Because Jas. Gordon is a judge in Scotland, and an ecclesiastical one: viz. one of the Commissaries who are the 3 Judges of the supreme Consistorial Court at Edinr. . . . You are aware that the Scotch Church acknowledge no head but J. Christ—utterly denies the King’s or Parlt.’s right to interfere in any respect, and rejects with the utmost indignation all attempts (which, since the aboln. of Episcopacy, indeed, have never been made) to dictate, or even hint at, any form of prayers, each parson being left wholly to himself, except as far as the Church Courts (viz.; Presbytery, Synod and General Assembly) may regulate their doctrine and discipline. Now a question ought to be asked on this Gordon’s conduct. . . .”