RootsChat.Com
Scotland (Counties as in 1851-1901) => Scotland => Topic started by: SANTUDM on Friday 19 September 25 14:23 BST (UK)
-
Hi all! Not sure this is the right group; if not, please redirect me.
I’m attaching a snippet from the Kildrummy kirk session/accts, dated 9 Aug 1804. My rough reading (not fully confident) is:
Then settled Accts [accounts] with Alexr Murdoch & after paying him 2 years officer meal & Cess for Templeton for Lammas, & two years fees to William ...”
Main question: another source lists Alexander Murdoch as ground officer on the estate of Kildrummy. In this context, what exactly did a ground officer do, and how might that relate (if at all) to the term "officer meal" appearing in the account?
Any standard definitions, comparable examples from other parish books, or corrections to my reading would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
-
Ground officer was the estate manager.
-
Ground officer was the estate manager.
Thanks very much! That matches my understanding: a ground officer was essentially the estate’s “man on the ground”, dealing with tenants, day-to-day disputes, rents/entries and boundaries, and carrying out the factor’s (or owner’s) instructions.
What still puzzles me is the kirk session accounts entry I posted. I’d have expected a ground officer to be paid by the estate, so why would this appear in the kirk accounts? Is "officer meal" here a parish/kirk-officer allowance (a stipend in meal), i.e., the same man holding two different offices? Any idea will be very helpful.
-
Hi,
I think that this is in reference to him being an officer of the Kirk, not his role as ground officer to the estate. Is there any other reference to him in the minutes of the parish meetings?
-
Hi, I think that this is in reference to him being an officer of the Kirk, not his role as ground officer to the estate. Is there any other reference to him in the minutes of the parish meetings?
Thanks! Yes, there are several other mentions of Alexander in the parish books. For example (rough reading):
To Cash from A. Murdoch to Acct of a Mill Farmers
To Wm. Gennie 9/2½
To Alexr Garden 9/8½
To Nathaniel Murison 2/1½
To Wm. Brown 10
To Jo. Gibben 10
Due by Templeton 3/8½
I read this as cash handled by A. Murdoch for the mill farmer’s account, with the lines beneath listing payments to individual payees (Gennie, Garden, Murison, Brown, Gibben) and a balance due by Templeton.
-
I was interested in establishing what a ground officer did. Found a case where a tenant refused to pay - 4s 3d annually - for his services. Appears nothing laid down - it had been going on since time immemorial. Read through the case but nothing mentioned of the services of the ground officer to justify each tenant's paying for a service.
-
The Scottish Register, 1794
-
I was interested in establishing what a ground officer did. Found a case where a tenant refused to pay - 4s 3d annually - for his services. Appears nothing laid down - it had been going on since time immemorial. Read through the case but nothing mentioned of the services of the ground officer to justify each tenant's paying for a service.
Thanks! I can add a period description from General View of the Agriculture of the Central Highlands (1794). I’ve attached an image of the passage for reference.
In my own case, Alexander Murdoch appears in 1801 and again in 1809 in "to let" notices on the Kildrummy estate, named as the person to show the farms and crofts to prospective tenants.
-
The Scottish Register, 1794
Thanks! I’d just attached the same passage. One interesting data point: in 1782 a similar "to let" notice of Kildrummy estate names as ground officer the man I believe was Alexander’s father-in-law. That makes me suspect this was a trust-based office that could pass within a family—often father to son, or, as I suspect in this case, father-in-law to son-in-law.
-
Returning to the thread: my working hypothesis is that ground-officer stipends wouldn’t normally run through the kirk accounts. More likely, because a ground officer already dealt with the tenantry, the session also engaged the same man as kirk/session officer (beadle) in parallel—so "officer meal" would be his in-kind parish allowance, separate from any estate pay. Unless there’s another contemporary usage of "officer meal" I’m missing, that seems to fit the entries (esp. the settling of accounts and wages "allowed"). Happy to be corrected! :)
-
I've seen "Ground Officer Fees" and "Ground Officer Corn". Re cereal/meal amounts described in pecks or firlots.
Don't see the transfer of the office of Ground Officer in the hands of the holder/incumbent - the decision was his employer's. But the nature of the role demanded trust in the holder - hence the holder would advise employer?
-
Ground officer was the estate manager.
Thanks very much! That matches my understanding: a ground officer was essentially the estate’s “man on the ground”, dealing with tenants, day-to-day disputes, rents/entries and boundaries, and carrying out the factor’s (or owner’s) instructions.
What still puzzles me is the kirk session accounts entry I posted. I’d have expected a ground officer to be paid by the estate, so why would this appear in the kirk accounts? Is "officer meal" here a parish/kirk-officer allowance (a stipend in meal), i.e., the same man holding two different offices? Any idea will be very helpful.
You're right. I think you can describe a hierarchy: There's the owner of the estate (landowner), then the factor, who manages the estate's affairs on behalf of the owner, and then lastly there is the ground officer, who, as you put it, is the "man on the ground" who has to interact with the tenants on a day-to-day basis, resolve disputes, and generally carry out the orders of the factor.
-
Have spotted the Ground Officer reporting to the "manager" - presumably "factor"?
-
Hi, so that makes sense, the Minister / Session Clerk was setting up for officers meal (corn) very much in arrears. Looking at the other accounts he seems to be something of a late payer!
-
I've seen "Ground Officer Fees" and "Ground Officer Corn". Re cereal/meal amounts described in pecks or firlots.
Don't see the transfer of the office of Ground Officer in the hands of the holder/incumbent - the decision was his employer's. But the nature of the role demanded trust in the holder - hence the holder would advise employer?
Thanks, that’s very helpful. The references to "Ground Officer Fees" and "Ground Officer Corn" (in pecks/firlots) are especially interesting. Do you recall whether those entries were in estate accounts or kirk accounts?
-
Hi, so that makes sense, the Minister / Session Clerk was setting up for officers meal (corn) very much in arrears. Looking at the other accounts he seems to be something of a late payer!
Hi — really? That’s very helpful, thank you! My English is basic (I’m from Argentina) and the handwriting in these books is hard for me; I’ve been reading them word by word and managed to pick out some names and phrases, but I didn’t grasp the overall context. Your note that the minister/session clerk was settling up for the officer’s meal (corn) well in arrears, and that he seems to be a late payer in other accounts, is exactly the context I was looking for. If you happen to spot anything else of interest in those accounts, I’d be very grateful for any pointers. Thanks again!
-
This may be of use. https://dsl.ac.uk/entry/snd/officer
-
Post #4, can you advise which page it was, the snip you sent is a bit heard to read out of contect.
I think it is Alex Gordon and Mill Fanner, not Farmer.
-
Post #4, can you advise which page it was, the snip you sent is a bit heard to read out of contect.
I think it is Alex Gordon and Mill Fanner, not Farmer.
Yes, of course, it's image 14. Many thanks!
-
This may be of use. https://dsl.ac.uk/entry/snd/officer
Many thanks, that makes "officer meal" much clearer.
What still puzzles me is why the entry sits in the kirk session accounts. Three possibilities occur to me:
1. "Officer meal" here is simply the parish/kirk officer’s stipend in meal, unrelated to the estate role—i.e. the same man holding two offices;
2. The session clerk was also acting locally as a disbursing agent for estate/baron-court expenses; or
3. The volume is a hybrid, mixing session entries with heritors/stent/cess bookkeeping.
-
Reading through this looks like the personal accounts of the minister, not strictly Kirk session minutes, miss indexing? References to the boys and my sister suggests this. It does not look like other Kirk session minutes I have read.
-
Reading through this looks like the personal accounts of the minister, not strictly Kirk session minutes, miss indexing? References to the boys and my sister suggests this. It does not look like other Kirk session minutes I have read.
That’s a very interesting observation, thanks. For Kildrummy there are three volumes online: two are Kirk Session minutes, and one (this one) is the accounts. On page 1 of this accounts volume it’s explicitly headed "Day Book".
-
On page 1 of this accounts volume it’s explicitly headed "Day Book".
[/quote]
Ministers often kept notebooks recording day-to-day parish business. Relevant bits would be written up in the Session minutes and accounts.
-
Perhaps it is just that this particular person held both the post of ground officer and Kirk officer (i.e. beadle)? I don't think it's necessarily the case that one person always held both positions.