William Erskine Marrs1 #674 Relationship=5th great-grandfather of Julie Liane Marrs. Appears on charts:      Pedigree for Charles Clifton Marrs      Descendant Chart for William Erskine Marrs      William Erskine Marrs was born at Scotland.       William Erskine Marrs was also known as William Erskine. He immigrated circa 1720 to the colonies from Bristol.2      William Erskine Marrs THE ANCIENT EARLDOM OF MAR: Extract from The Great Historic Families of Scotland, By James Taylor, M.A., D.D., F.S.A and published in 1887 The original earldom of Mar has been pronounced by the Ulster King-of-Arms, the most ancient title in Great Britain, perhaps in Europe. The learned and accurate Lord Hailes remarks that ‘this is one of the earldoms whose history is lost in antiquity. It existed before our records and before the era of genuine history.’ It has been held in succession by members of the great historic houses of Douglas and Stewart, Drummond and Erskine; has been borne by the hero of Otterburn and by the victor in the critical battle of Harlaw, which finally decided the protracted struggle for supremacy in the Highlands between the Saxon and the Gael; by the sons of two of the Scottish kings, and by three rulers who governed Scotland with vice-regal authority, one of the three being the most sagacious and energetic statesman that ever held the reins of government in our country. The province of Mar, from which the title is taken, lies between the rivers Don and Dee, and is the most extensive and interesting district in Aberdeenshire. The Highland portion of the earldom, termed Braemar, is noted for its wild and majestic scenery. It contains Macdhui, the highest mountain in Scotland, Cairntoul, Ben Avon, and Cairngorm, which are little inferior in height, and ‘dark Lochnagar,’ celebrated in the poetry of Byron. The Garioch, which in the olden time was connected with Mar and furnished a second title to the earldom, is an extensive and fertile valley, and used to be termed the granary of Aberdeen. The ancient title borne by the governors of the province of Mar was ‘mormaor,’ a Pictish dignity inferior only to that of king. About the beginning of the tenth century this designation was exchanged for the Saxon title of earl. Tradition has preserved a curious story of a remarkable incident connected with the death of one of the mormaors of Mar, named Melbrigda, about the close of the ninth century. He fell in battle with Sigurd, the first Scandinavian Earl of Orkney, who had conquered the greater part of the northern counties of Scotland and invaded the province of Mar; but his death was revenged upon the victor in a most singular manner. Melbrigda was noted for a large and very prominent tooth, and Sigurd, having cut off the head of the fallen mormaor, suspended it to his saddle-bow and galloped in triumph across the battlefield. The rapidity of the motion caused the head of Melbrigda to strike violently about the saddle, and his prominent tooth inflicted a wound on Sigurd’s thigh which festered and mortified and caused his death. The first mormaor of Mar whose name has come down to our day in a written document was Martachus, who in 1065 was witness to a charter of Malcolm Canmore in favour of the Culdees of Lochleven. His son, Gratnach, who about fifty years later witnessed the foundation charter of the monastery of Scone by Alexander I., appears to have been the first of the great hereditary rulers of Mar who bore the title of earl. From this period downward the heads of the house of Mar filled a most influential position at the Court and in the national councils; they held the highest offices in the royal household, and took a prominent part in most of the great events in the history of the country. They were connected by a double marriage with the illustrious line of Bruce; the restorer of Scottish independence having taken to wife a daughter of David, sixth Earl of Mar, while Gratney, seventh earl, married Christiana, sister of King Robert, and received as part of her dowry the strong castle of Kildrummie, in Aberdeenshire, which was long the chief seat of the family. His son Donald, eighth earl, was taken prisoner in 1306, at the battle of Methven, in which his royal uncle was defeated, and did not regain his liberty till after the crowning victory of Bannockburn. On the death of Randolph, the famous Earl of Moray, Earl Donald was chosen Regent in his stead, August 2nd, 1332. But only two days thereafter he was killed, at the battle of Dupplin, in which the Scots were surprised and defeated with great slaughter by the ‘Disinherited Barons.’ Thomas, the ninth earl, or, according to another mode of reckoning, the thirteenth who enjoyed that dignity, was one of the most powerful nobles of his day. He held the office of Great Chamberlain of Scotland, and was repeatedly sent as ambassador to England. He died in 1377, leaving no issue, and in him ended the direct male line of the Earls of Mar. His sister Margaret was, at the time of Earl Thomas’s death, the wife of William, Earl of Douglas, nephew and heir of the ‘Good Sir James,’ the friend of Robert Bruce. On the death of his brother-in-law he obtained possession of the historical earldom of Mar and transmitted it, along with his own hereditary titles and estates, to his son James, the hero of Otterburn, ‘the dead man that won a fight‘—one of the most renowned in Scottish history. The Douglas estates were inherited by Archibald ‘the Grim,’ the kinsman of Earl James, while the earldom of Mar passed to his sister, Isabella, wife of Sir Malcolm Drummond, brother of Annabella, Queen of Scotland, wife of Robert III. About the year 1403, Sir Malcolm was suddenly surprised by a band of ruffians, who treated him with such barbarity that he soon after died, leaving no issue. This outrage was universally ascribed to Alexander Stewart, natural son of the Earl of Buchan, the ‘Wolf of Badenoch,’ fourth son of Robert II. After the death of her husband the Countess was residing quietly and in fancied security at her castle of Kildrummie, when it was suddenly attacked and stormed by Stewart at the head of a formidable band of Highland freebooters and outlaws, and either by violence or persuasion the young Countess was induced to become the wife of the redoubted cateran, and to make over to him, on the 12th of August, 1404, her earldom of Mar and Garioch, with all her other castles. In order, however, to give a legal aspect to the transaction, Stewart presented himself, on the 19th of September, at the gate of the castle of Kildrummie, and surrendered to the Countess ‘the castle and all within it, and the title-deeds therein kept; in testimony thereof he delivered to her the keys to dispose of as she pleased.’ The Countess, holding the keys in her hand, declared that deliberately and of her own free will she chose Stewart for her husband, and conferred upon him the castle, pertinents, &c., as a free marriage gift, of which he took instruments. It appears that even this formal transaction was not deemed sufficient to give validity to the transaction, for on the 9th December following, the Countess, taking her station in the fields outside her castle, in the presence of the Bishop of Ross, and the sheriff and posse cornitatus of the county, along with the tenantry on the estate, that it might appear that she was really acting without force on Stewart’s part or fear on hers, granted a charter to him of her castle and estates duly signed and sealed. Strange to say, this lawless freebooter afterwards rendered most important services to his country by repressing the disorders of the northern counties and repelling the attacks of English invaders; and he obtained high renown, both in England and on the Continent, on account of his valour and skill in the exercises of chivalry. He was repeatedly sent on embassies to the English Court, and, at one time, held the office of Warden of the Marches. His restless spirit and love of fame carried him abroad in quest of distinction; and Wyntoun states that, during a residence of three months in Paris he kept open house, and was highly honoured for his wit, virtue, and bravery. From the Court of France he proceeded to Bruges, and joined the army which the Duke of Burgundy was leading to the assistance of his brother, John of Bavaria, the bishop-elect of Liege, ‘a clerk not of clerk-like appearing,’ who was in danger from the rebellion of the people of his diocese. The subsequent victory at Liege was mainly owing to the skill and courage of Mar, who slew in single combat Sir Henry Horn, the leader of the insurgents. He was the ‘stout and mighty Earl of Mar’ who gained the battle of Harlaw, in the year 1411, defeating Donald of the Isles with terrible slaughter, though outnumbered by ten to one, and thus terminating the protracted contest for superiority between the Celtic and the Saxon races. The ostensible and immediate cause of this sanguinary conflict was the claim to the earldom of Ross, which had been held by the Earl of Buchan, Mar’s father, in right of his wife. Alexander, Earl of Ross, the son of the Countess by her first husband, married Lady Isabel Stewart, eldest daughter of the Regent Albany. The only issue of this marriage was a daughter, named Euphemia, who became Countess of Ross at her father’s death. She afterwards entered a convent, and entrusted the management of her estate to her grandfather, the Regent, with the intention, it was supposed, of resigning it in favour of her mother’s brother, the Earl of Buchan, Albany’s second son. Donald, Lord of the Isles, who had married Euphemia’s aunt, Margaret, the only sister of the deceased Earl Alexander, insisted that Euphemia, by becoming a nun, must be regarded as dead in law, and demanded that his wife should be put in possession of the earldom. The Regent, however, refused to accede to the claim, and Donald took up arms to enforce it. At the head of ten thousand men, he suddenly invaded and took possession of the district. He was encountered at Dingwall by Angus Dow Mackay of Farr, at the head of a large body of men from Sutherland. The Mackays were routed with great slaughter, their leader was taken prisoner, and his brother was killed. Elated with his success, Donald pressed on through Moray, laying waste the country with fire and sword, and penetrated into Aberdeenshire, for the purpose of executing his threat to burn the town of Aberdeen. He was encountered at a place called Harlaw, in the Garioch, about fifteen miles from that city, by the Earl of Mar, at the head of the chivalry of Angus and Mearns—the Ogilvies, Maules, Lyons, Lindsays, Carnegies, Leslies, Leiths, Arbuthnots, Burnets, &c., who, though few in number, were better armed and disciplined than the Highlanders of whom Donald’s host was composed. In the words of old Elspeth’s ballad, in the ‘Antiquary ‘— ‘If they hae twenty thousand blades And we twice ten times ten, Yet they hae but their tartan plaids And we are mail-clad men.’ The battle, which was fought on the 24th of July, 1411, was long and fiercely contested, and night alone separated the combatants. The Earl of Mar lost one half of his force, and among the slain were Sir James Scrymgeour, Constable of Dundee; Sir Alexander Ogilvie, the Sheriff of Angus, with his eldest son; Sir Thomas Murray; Sir Robert Maule of Panmure; Sir Alexander Irvine of Drum; Leslie of Balquhain, with six of his sons; Sir Alexander Straiton of Lauriston, and Sir Robert Davidson, Provost of Aberdeen. The Earl of Mar and the survivors of his little army were so exhausted with fatigue that they passed the night on the battlefield, expecting the contest to be renewed next morning; but when the day broke they found that Donald and the remains of his force had retired during the night, leaving a thousand men, with the chiefs of Macintosh and Maclean, on the battlefield, and, retreating through Ross, they gained the shelter of their native fastnesses. ‘It was a singular chance,’ says Sir Walter Scott, ‘that brought against Donald, who might be called the King of the Gaels, one whose youth had been distinguished as a leader of these plundering bands; and no less strange that the Islander’s claim to the earldom of Ross should be traversed by one whose title to that of Mar was so much more challengeable.’ After the death of the Countess of Mar, the title and estates should have devolved on the heir of line, Janet Keith, wife of Sir Thomas Erskine, and great-granddaughter of Earl Gratney, but Earl Alexander, who had only a life interest in the earldom, resigned it in 1426 into the hands of the King, James I., and received a grant of the titles and estates to himself for life, and after him to his natural son, Sir Thomas Stewart, and his lawful heirs male. Earl Alexander died in 1435, and his son having predeceased him without issue, the earldom, in terms of the recent charter, reverted to the Crown. Sir Robert Erskine, the son of Sir Thomas and Lady Janet, claimed the earldom in right of his mother, as second heir to the Countess Isabel, 22nd April, 1438, before the Sheriff of Aberdeen, and, in the following November, was invested in the estates. He assumed the title of Earl of Mar, and granted various charters to vassals of the earldom; but, in 1449, James II. obtained a reduction of his service before an assize of error, and took possession of the estates, no doubt in order to carry out the favourite policy of himself and his father, of weakening the dangerous power of the barons. It was subsequently conferred on John, second son of James II., who was put to death in 1449 for alleged treason against his brother, James III. The next possessor of the earldom was Cochrane, one of the favourites of that monarch, who was hanged over the bridge at Lauder in 1482. It was then granted, in 1486, to Alexander Stewart, Duke of Ross, a younger son of James III. On his death it reverted to the Crown, and in February, 1561-2, it was conferred by Queen Mary on her natural brother, Lord James Stewart, afterwards the celebrated Regent; but he speedily resigned it, preferring the dignity of Earl of Moray. The Queen then, in 1565, bestowed the title on John, fifth Lord Erskine, the descendant and heir male of Sir Robert Erskine, who had unsuccessfully claimed it a hundred and thirty years before. From that period downwards the Mar honours have followed the varying fortunes of the family of Erskine, one of the most illustrious of the historic houses of Scotland. The greater part of the extensive estates which in ancient times belonged to the earldom had, by this time, passed into various hands, and could not be recovered; but the remnant which still remained in the possession of the Crown was gifted to the new earl. On the death of John Francis, sixteenth Earl of Mar and eleventh Earl of Kellie, in 1866, his cousin, Walter Coningsby Erskine, inherited the family estates along with the earldom of Kellie, which were entailed on heirs male; while the ancient earldom of Mar was claimed by John Francis Goodeve, the only son of the late earl’s sister, who thereupon assumed the name of Erskine. His claim was at first universally admitted. He was presented at Court as Earl of Mar, his vote was repeatedly received at the election of representative peers, and his right to the title was conceded even by his cousin, Walter Coningsby Erskine, the new Earl of Kellie. By-and-by, however, Lord Kellie laid claim also to the earldom of Mar, but he died before his petition could be considered by the House of Lords. It was renewed by his son, and was in due course referred to the Committee for Privileges. In support of the claim it was pleaded that the title of Earl of Mar, conferred by Queen Mary on John, Lord Erskine, in 1565, was not the restoration of an ancient peerage, but the creation of a new one; that the original earldom of Mar was purely territorial, one of the seven ancient earldoms of Scotland, and was therefore indivisible; that this dignity terminated at the death of Earl Thomas in 1377; that William, first Earl of Douglas, his sister’s husband, must have obtained the earldom by charter and not by right of his wife, as at his death the title and estates descended to their son James, second Earl of Douglas, while his mother was still living; that her daughter, Isabella, became the wife of Sir Malcolm Drummond, who was styled Lord of Mar and of the Garioch, not earl; that her second husband, Alexander Stewart, obtained possession of the territorial earldom of Mar in right of his wife, but did not become earl until he obtained seizen under the Crown; that he survived the Countess for many years, and acted, and was treated by the Crown, as the owner in fee of the earldom, and that on his death the Crown entered into possession of the estates in terms of the charter granted to the earl by King James I; that from this period downwards the lands had been broken up and disposed of by the Sovereign at his pleasure, different portions of them having been granted at various times to royal favourites, and that the title had been conferred in succession upon several persons who had no connection with its original possessors. The territorial earldom, it was asserted, was indivisible, and could not be separated from the title, and as the former had ceased to exist, the ancient dignity could not be revived. It was, therefore, contended that Queen Mary must have created a new dignity when on her marriage to Darnley in 1565 she raised Lord Erskine to the rank of an earl; that the fact that throughout Queen Mary’s reign he ranked as the junior and not the premier earl, as must have been the case if the title had been the old dignity revived in his person, shows that his earldom was a new creation, and that as there is no charter in existence describing the dignity conferred upon Lord Erskine, the prima-facie presumption is that it descended to heirs male. On the other hand, it was pleaded by Mr. Goodeve Erskine. who opposed Lord Kellie’s claim, that inasmuch as the earldom of Mar was enjoyed by two countesses, mother and daughter, it could not be a male fief; and that as Sir Robert Erskine is admitted to have been second heir ‘of line and blood’ to the Countess Isabel through his mother, Janet Keith, great-granddaughter of Donald, third earl, he was de jure Earl of Mar, though excluded from the title and estates by an act of tyranny and oppression on the part of James I., who was at this time bent on breaking down the power of the nobles, and for that reason illegally seized the land and suppressed the dignity of this great earldom; that the Erskines never relinquished their claim to the earldom, while it remained ‘in the simple and nakit possession of the Crown without ony richt of property therein,’ and made repeated though unsuccessful efforts to recover their rights; that Queen Mary had in express terms recognised the right of Sir Robert Erskine’s descendant, John, Lord Erskine, to the earldom of which his ancestor had been unjustly deprived, as she said, through ‘the troubles of the times and the influence of corrupt advisers,’ and had declared that, ‘moved by conscience, as it was her duty to restore just heritages to their lawful heirs, she restored to John, Lord Erskine, the earldom of Mar and the lordship and regality of Garioch, with all the usual privileges incident and belonging thereto, together with the lands of Strathdon, Braemar, Cromar, and Strathdee.’ Queen Mary, therefore, it was contended, did not create a new peerage but restored an old one; and even if the title conferred upon Lord Erskine had been a new creation, the presumption is that, like the original dignity, it would have descended to heirs female as well as male. With regard to the assumption that Queen Mary must have granted a patent or charter conferring the ‘peerage earldom.’ on Lord Erskine, it was pointed out that there is no proof that any such document ever existed, that there is not the remotest allusion to it in any contemporary history, and that Lord Redesdale’s suggestion that the deed may have been accidentally destroyed, or that the Earl of Mar may have destroyed it to serve some sinister purpose, is a mere conjecture, wholly unsupported by evidence. When it was proposed to restore the forfeited title, in 1824, to John Erskine of Mar, it was remitted to the law officers of the Crown, one of whom was Sir John Copley, afterwards Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst, to investigate whether he had proved himself to be heir to his grandfather, the attainted earl. They reported in the affirmative, and the attainder was reversed in his favour. It was noted as an important fact that John Erskine was declared in the Act to be the grandson and lineal heir of his grandfather through his mother—a striking proof, it was said, that the earldom restored by Queen Mary was not limited to heirs male. Mr. Goodeve Erskine rests his claim to be the heir of his uncle on the very same ground on which his grandfather based his claim to be the heir of the Jacobite earl, viz., through his mother; and it was argued that, since the claim was regarded as valid in the one case, it ought to be so held in the other also. Great stress was laid on the position which the earldom occupies in the Union Roll, as showing that it has all along been regarded as the original dignity, and not a new creation. In 1606 commissioners were appointed by James VI. to prepare a roll of the Scottish peers, according to their precedence, and the document prepared by them, which was corrected by the Court of Session, is known in Scottish history as the ‘Decreet of Ranking‘— the official register of the peerage of Scotland—the basis, in fact, of the Union Roll. Now in this nearly contemporary document the earldom of Mar has a much higher antiquity assigned to it than the date of 1565, the earl being placed above several earls whose titles were conferred in the fifteenth century. On the Union Roll it has the date of 1457 prefixed to it. These arguments, however, failed to satisfy the Committee for Privileges, consisting of Lords Redesdale, Chelmsford, and Cairns, who decided that the dignity conferred by Queen Mary on Lord Erskine was a new and personal honour, and is held on the same tenure as the other peerages possessed by the Erskine family, all of which are limited to heirs male. This decision has not given universal satisfaction. A considerable number of influential Scottish peers, including the Earls of Crawford and Balcarres, Stair, Galloway, and Mansfield, the Marquis of Huntly, Viscounts Strathallan and Arbuthnot, and Lord Napier of Ettrick, have repeatedly protested against the Earl of Kellie’s claim to vote as the Earl of Mar, whose name stands fifth on the Union Roll. An elaborate work in two volumes octavo was prepared by the late Earl of Crawford and Balcarres to prove that a miscarriage of justice has taken place in consequence of the decision of the Committee for Privileges on the Mar peerage case. Mr. Goodeve Erskine, who continues to assume the title of Earl of Mar and Baron Garioch, asserts that though the Committee for Privileges have unwarrantably authorised the Earl of Kellie to assume a title which never had an existence, and is a mere figment of their own imagination, their decision has no bearing on his right to the ancient earldom of Mar, which is claimed by no one but himself, and of which he is the undoubted lineal heir. The feeling that injustice was done to Mr. Goodeve Erskine by the decision of the Committee is so strong that a Bill, entitled ‘Earldom of Mar Restitution Bill,’ has been brought into the House of Lords, with the signature and under the authority of the Queen, for the purpose of restoring the ancient earldom to Mr. Erskine. It was read a second time on the 20th of May, 1885, and referred to a Select Committee, who reported that the preamble had been proved. The Bill passed through both Houses of Parliament without opposition, and became law before the close of the session.3      ERSKINE. This family descended from Henry de Erskine, who owned the barony of Erskine, in Renfrewshire, in the 13th century. During the War of Independence they supported King Robert the Bruce. In 1435 Sir Robert Erskine assumed the title of Earl of Mar and his son, who was deprived of the Earldom in 1457, was created Lord Erskine in 1467. Alexander, son of the 4th Lord, was ancestor of the Earls of Kellie. The Earldom of Mar was restored in 1565, and the 6th Earl is notable for the part he played in the Jacobite Rising of 1715. There are several important branches of this family.4      Jacobite Heritage "Jacobite was the name given to that party which, after the Revolution of 1688, continued to support the Stuart dynasty, as representing the principle of divine right. It was derived from Jacobus, the Latin for James. The origin of the party, however, may be traced to the reign of Charles I, for the Jacobites of 1688 were the direct successors of the Cavaliers of 1642, as the Whigs were of the Puritans." (Ruvigny, The Legitimist Kalendar, 1895). The Jacobites deny the validity of the usurpation of the throne first by the Prince and Princess of Orange, next by the Princess Anne of Denmark, and finally by the Elector Georg I of Hannover and his heirs. For the Jacobites, King James II and VII continued to reign until his death in 1701. He was succeeded by his son, James III and VIII, who in turn was succeeded by his sons, Charles III and Henry IX and I. By the death of the latter in 1807 the legitimate male line of the Royal House of Stuart became extinct. The succession to the throne then passed to the senior heir of King Charles I, descended from his youngest daughter Henrietta Anne; this prince was none other than Charles Emanuel IV of Savoy. The succession to the throne has continued until today when it is represented by Duke Francis of Bavaria. Jacobitism is, however, more than merely a belief that a different person has best right to the throne. It is also a radically different understanding of the place which the monarch and the monarchy have within society. Jacobites reject the idea that the king has his authority delegated to him by Parliament. Many hold that the king's authority comes directly from Almighty God. Declaration of the Earl of Mar, September 9, 1715 Our rightful and natural King James the 8th, who, by the grace of God, is now coming to relieve us from our oppressions, having been pleased to entrust us with the direction of his affairs and the command of his forces in this his Ancient Kingdom of Scotland. And some of his faithful subjects and servants met at Aboyne, viz. the Lord Huntley, the Lord Tullibardine, the Earl Mareschal, the Earl of Southesk, Glingary from the Clans, Glenderule from the Earl of Broadalbine, and gentlemen of Argyleshire, Mr. Patrick Lyon of Auchterhouse, the Laird of Auldbair, Lieutenant-General George Hamilton, Major-general Gordon, and myself, having taken into our consideration His Majesty's last and late orders to us, find, that as this is now the time that he ordered us to appear openly in arms for him; so it seems to us absolutely necessary for His Majesty's service and the relieving of our native country from all its hardships, that all his faithful and loving subjects and lovers of their country should with all possible speed put themselves into arms. These are therefore, in His Majesty's name and authority and by virtue of the power aforesaid and by the King's special order to me thereunto, to require and empower you forthwith to raise your fencible men with their best arms; and you are immediately to march them to join me and some other of the King's forces at the Invor of Bracmar on Monday next in order to proceed in our march to attend the King's Standard with his other forces. The King, intending that his forces shall be paid from the time of their setting out, he expects, as he positively orders, that they behave themselves civilly, and commit no plundering nor other disorders upon the highest penalties and his displeasure, which is expected you'll see observed. Now is the time for all good men to show their zeal for His Majesty's service, whose cause is so deeply concerned, and the relief of our native country from oppression, and a foreign yoke too heavy for us and our posterity to bear; and to endeavour the restoring, not only of our rightful and native king, but also our country to its ancient, free, and independent constitution under him whose ancestors have reigned over us for so many generations. In so honourable, good, and just a cause, we cannot doubt of the assistance, direction, and blessing of Almighty God, who has so often rescued the Royal Family of Stuart and our country from sinking under oppression. Your punctual observance of these orders is expected, for the doing of all which this shall be to you and all you employ in the execution of them a sufficient warrant. Mar Given at Bracmar, the 9th of September, 1715.5      Various branches of this family and published prose have very similar patterns to the story of William's parentage and immigration. Here are just a few. "William Erskine Marr of Scotland (youngest son of one of the Earls of Mar) came to the Colonies, sailing from the Port of Bristol, England to escape punishment. Spelled the name Marrs. While in Scotland, he lived in the Royal Castle of Balmoral, located in the Mar District of Scotland." [Genealogical History of Washington D.C. #3007 printed on p14, "Marrs" by Mabel Marrs] "Traditions says he married an Indian Maiden by the name of Munday in PA. Records say he had 3 sons born in PA, Samuel, Henry Munday, and Barnabus. The year 1720, a William Erskine Marr, Nobleman of Scotland leaving a vast estate in Scotland which none of rights belong to his American descendants, emigrated to America in order to avoid being put to death of severe torture as a religious Heretic. The dominate religionist had passed his sentence, which was that he be tied to the tail of a wild colt and it be turned loose in the streets of Edinburgh. To avoid this fearful fate he fled his country and left friends and property behind. Originally the name was spelled Marr, but to avoid detection added an S since which time it has been written Marrs. Upon his arrival in the land of religious freedom, he located near the town of Little York, PA. He previously lived in the Royal Castle of Balmoral in the Mar District of Scotland."History Book in 1883 by Beers, Sidney, Ohio. [Marrs & Allied Families, published 1965, Four sisters in Texas, Louis E. Marrs, Sidney Ohio, Aug. 6, 1930 (From Book 1, Betty Jean [Albertson] Marrs, 12/1/1975)] "To start William Erskine was the youngest son of the Earl of Mar. Our information is that the leading religionist of the area had sentenced to death by being dragged, tied to a wild pony's tail, through the streets of Edinburgh. He bribed a prison guard with a gold coin he had hidden in his shoe and was taken to Bristol Harbor in England where he hired on as a deck hand. When he arrived in America he jumped ship, added an "S" to his name and settled in Little York Penn. in 1720." [K. Ray Marrs, grandson of Greenup "Doc" Marrs, Family story passed down, received as email 3/8/98] From my accounts, I would guess this: In 1715, when the Earl of Mar declared war on England and lost, his sons were also banished from the political situation of the times. Young William was 15 when his father fled to France. When William was ~20, he left the British Isles through Bristol by ship to the colonies. I would guess that the ship came to port in Philadelphia, but I have no evidence of this. By some means, William moved out to what is now the southeast area of York Country, Pennsylvania, an area called Chanceford. It is assumed that he married someone with the last name MUNDAY since this is the middle name of the second son. His Son Samuel married Francina Bradshaw who was also from Chanceford. [Anthony Marrs, nephew of Clara Leib, http://www.madridnm.com/marrs/marrs.html].      Children of William Erskine Marrs: Samuel Marrs+   b. 1 Dec 1740, d. 27 Dec 1817 Henry Munday Marrs+   b. c 1745, d. b Feb 1821 Barnabas Marrs+   b. c 1746, d. a 1813 Citations [S108] Mabel Marrs, Marrs, #1, p14. [S108] Mabel Marrs, Marrs, 14. [S247] Electronic Web Site, online From "Electric Scotland" accessed at http://www.burkes-peerage.net/sites/scotland/esnews/es0302.asp. [S178] Lochcarron Products Ltd., Clan Histories. [S247] Electronic Web Site, online http://members.home.net/jacobites/index.htm. Samuel Marrs1,2 b. 1 December 1740, d. 27 December 1817, #675 Pedigree Relationship=4th great-grandfather of Julie Liane Marrs. Appears on charts:      Pedigree for Charles Clifton Marrs      Descendant Chart for William Erskine Marrs      Samuel Marrs was born on 1 December 1740 at York Co., Pennsylvania. He was the son of William Erskine Marrs. Samuel Marrs married Francina Bradshaw, daughter of Christopher Bradshaw and Phyliss (?), before 1762. Samuel Marrs married second Elizabeth (?) before 1778. Samuel Marrs married third Letitia Laird on 5 August 1788 at Washington Co., Virginia. They did not have any children.3 Samuel Marrs has also been reported to have been married Letitia Laird in August 1778. Samuel Marrs died on 27 December 1817 at Nicholasville, Jessamine Co., Kentucky, at age 77.4 His estate was probated in January 1818 at Nicholasville, Jessamine Co., Kentucky.5      He settled in at Tazewell Co., Virginia, in 1773.6,7      Samuel Marrs is listed as having 0 Negroes, 3 Horses, and 6 Cattle. In 1795 at Mercer Co., Kentucky.8 He left a will 5 April 1810 Nicholasville, Jessamine Co., Kentucky.      In the name of God, Amen: I Saml. Marrs of Jessamine County and State of Kentucky considering the uncertainty of this Mortal life and beings of sound and perfect mind and memory, Blessed be the Almightily God for the same, do make and publish this my last Will and Testament in manner and form following. This is to say. First: I give and bequest unto my eldest son, Henry Marrs, one Dollar in addition to what he has received of me heretofore. I also give and bequeath unto my daughter Phillis Wynne formally Phyliss Marrs on hundred Dollars. I also give and bequeath unto Elizabeth Owen, formally Elizabeth Marrs one dollar. It is further my will that forty dollars of my estate be deposited in the hands of my son, James Marrs, to be paid to my daughter Elizabeth Owens at any time when said James thinks her need requires, if said sum or no part thereof be paid to her by me, James Marrs, after the date of these presents but in case by daughter Elizabeth Owens should die before the above sum of forty dollars in so much thereof is not paid to her, be paid to her children share and share alike. I also give and bequeath unto my son Chistopher Marrs, one dollar in addition to what he has received of me theretofore. I also give and bequeath unto the Children of Ruth Alderson, Formally Ruth Marrs, forty dollars to be divided share and share alike. I also give and bequeath unto my son, Samuel Marrs, one dollar in addition to what he has received of me heretofore. I also give and bequeath unto my son William Marrs thirty-four dollars in addition to what he has received of me heretofore. I also give and bequeath unto the children of my son, John Marrs eight dollars to be divided share and share alike. I also give and bequeath unto Samuel Marrs, son of John Marrs, one horse to be the value of fifty dollars. I also give and bequeath unto Letticia Marrs, daughter of my son John Marrs, nine dollars. I also give and bequeath unto my two younger sons, James and Josiah Marrs, all the remainder and residue of my estate of whatsoever nature and kind it may be both real and personal to be equally divided between them both share and share alike. And lastly I appoint my trust friends, John Kellar, Peter Poindexter with my sons, James and Josiah Marrs, my executors of this my Last will and Testament hereby revoking all former wills by me made, in witness, whereof I have hereunto set my hand and Seal the 5th day of April in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ten.      Samuel Marrs There are numerous documents and stories recording Samuel's life: Catnip Hill Rd. Farm was a small farm of 100 acres more or less bought of a Mr. Hampton for 105 pounds English money. He lived there until his death in 1817, 77 years of age. Samuel helped build the Fort at Hillsville, VA with Thomas Whitten, John Greenup, John Markman. They stationed a John Marrs and others at their homes to give protection for their families while they built the fort. [1773] Samuel Marrs built his family a small log cabin on Thomas Whitten land that he owned, this log cabin set on the North side of the Clinch River in the mouth of a little hollar just up from the Pisgah church (there in 1962, a white house sits on this spot, called the Cecil place). They lived here in their log home 13-20 years (Tazewell, VA). Samuel had son James 1774 the year after they settled near Tazewell, VA in Thompson Valley. He had by this time Henry, Phyllis, Elizabeth, Samuel Jr., Christopher, Ruth, William, John and James, making 12 children. [1785] He bought 105 acres of land from a surveyor (Patton). Land lay in Ella Perry hollar at the end of the hard surface road and Samuel built a large cabin near where Harry Peery's house stands now (1962). [1790] They lived here 4-5 years, then sold to Allen and bought land from the Cecils that lay along Clinch River through North Tazewell, VA, west across Huble Hill and into Baptist Valley. Francina died here; buried on the south hill behind log cabin. In 1962 this graveyard lies on the back of Henry Christians lot, 10-11 graves there. Samuel later moved from River Jack and his oldest son Henry married (1785, Elizabeth Maxwell). [Marrs History, Betty Jean Albertson Marrs] "I have heard my mother say he was a small active old man and that she had seen him and his two brothers ride to Lexington on horseback, it being 15 miles away. They were all 3 over 70 years of age at the time. He married first about 1760 in PA, he married second before 1781 and married third wife in VA. [Portions of letter written by John Marrs of Lexington, KY 1869, grandson of Samuel] A few years after his marriage it is believed he removed to Rockbridge Co, VA, but remained there but a short time, when he moved to what is now Tazewell County, VA. Samuel Marrs settled in Thompson's Valley, Tazewell Co. VA in 1773 (Bickley's History of Tazewell Co. VA, p344) and his wife Francina Bradshaw died there about 1775. She had brothers, James, John and Christopher Bradshaw. In 1793 he removed to Jessamine Co. KY and settled on the Catnip Hill Road on a small farm of 100 acres more or less bought of a Mr. Hampton for 105 pounds. Samuel lived on this farm until his death at age 77. About 1773 Samuel and Francina bought land in Thompson Valley in the area of Tazewell, VA. The log cabin set on the north side of the Clinch River. Here is where Francina is buried. She was buried on the south hill behind the log cabin. There are 10 or 11 graves there. The Gaines Tax List 1795 has Samuel in Mercer Co. KY, a Samuel Marrs in Barron Co. in 1800 and a Samuel Mars in Granklin Co. 8/10/1801. It was believed he was a small active man. He and his last wife are buried in the graveyard at the old place. [Marrs/Erskine by J. Leeper] He and Francina Bradshaw were married in PA and lived there for possibly 7 or 8 years, during which time their first 5 children were born. About 1768, they migrated southward and settled for a time in Augusta county, (became Rockbridge 1778). Here 3 sons Samuel W., William and John were born. Very shortly after the birth of John, the family migrated to Thompson’s Valley where James was born 1774. The next year Francina died (1775). A few years later, Samuel married the Widow Fowler. [Letter: George West Diehl, genealogist of the Rockbridge Historical Society, Dundee Plantation, R3 Lexington, VA 24450] Note: Elizabeth Fowler was made administrator of the estate of Samuel Fowler deceased, 3/17/1778 in the Washington Co. Court. Then, on 3/21/1780, James Dyshart was designated as the guardian for Mary and Samuel Fowler (orphans of Samuel Fowler). Perhaps, this is the family of "Widow Fowler, and this Mary was the girl Christopher Marrs married 2/10/1787.      Children of Samuel Marrs and Francina Bradshaw: Henry Marrs+   b. 6 Jul 1762, d. 1830 Phyllis Marrs+   b. 20 Sep 1763, d. 12 Jan 1855 Elizabeth Marrs+   b. 20 Dec 1764, d. 17 Mar 1836 Christopher Marrs+   b. 14 Feb 1766, d. 1853 Ruth Marrs+   b. 13 Oct 1767, d. 12 Jul 1839 Samuel W Marrs Jr.+   b. 31 Mar 1769, d. 12 Jun 1831 William Marrs+   b. 13 Oct 1770, d. 12 Mar 1844 John Marrs+   b. 10 Apr 1772, d. 1801 James Marrs+   b. 14 May 1774, d. 3 Feb 1834      Children of Samuel Marrs and Elizabeth (?): Josiah Marrs   b. 16 Feb 1781 Abigail Marrs   b. 24 Feb 1785 Citations [S108] Mabel Marrs, Marrs, #8, p15. [S86] Gene Pool Individual Records, online www.ancestry.com. [S194] Marriage IndexVA to 1800, online www. ancestry.com. [S108] Mabel Marrs, Marrs, p18-19. [S140] Will, proved Jan. Court 1818, page 375 of Will book.. [S108] Mabel Marrs, Marrs. [S81] Betty Jean Albertson Marrs, "BJ Albertson, Marrs Research", Book 1, pg2. [S77] Jean Leeper, Erskine/Marrs, Taxable Property within the District of Wm. Gaines Com..