murdered Lord Kilpont in consequence of his refusal to participate in
his design. Now, I may be allowed to remark, that besides Wishart having
always been regarded as a partial historian, and very questionable
authority on any subject connected with the motives or conduct of those
who differed from him in opinion, that even had Stewart formed such a
design, Kilpont, from his name and connexions, was likely to be the
very last man of whom Stewart would choose to make a confidant and
accomplice. On the other hand, the above account, though never, that I
am aware, before hinted at, has been a constant tradition in the family;
and, from the comparative recent date of the transaction, and the
sources from which the tradition has been derived, I have no reason to
doubt its perfect authenticity. It was most circumstantially detailed as
above, given to my father, Mr. Stewart, now of Ardvoirlich, many years
ago, by a man nearly connected with the family, who lived to the age of
100. This man was a great-grandson of James Stewart, by a natural son
John, of whom many stories are still current in this country, under his
appellation of JOHN DHU MHOR. This John was with his father at the time,
and of course was a witness of the whole transaction; he lived till
a considerable time after the Revolution, and it was from him that
my father's informant, who was a man before his grandfather, John dhu
Mhor's death, received the information as above stated.

"I have many apologies to offer for trespassing so long on your
patience; but I felt a natural desire, if possible, to correct what I
conceive to be a groundless imputation on the memory of my ancestor,
before it shall come to be considered as a matter of History. That he
was a man of violent passions and singular temper, I do not pretend to
deny, as many traditions still current in this country amply verify;
but that he was capable of forming a design to assassinate Montrose, the
whole tenor of his former conduct and principles contradict. That he was