If a certain young printer of the year 1724 had not subsequently risen from obscurity, and become a greater personage in history than the grandiloquent baronet who then presided over Pennsylvania and Delaware, by whose notice he was flattered,-if, having gone to London in reliance upon the repeated but never fulfilled promises of this patron, that young printer, whose name was Benjamin Franklin, had been lost to fame, like many another victim of bad conduct, and the world had never seen his autobiography, Sir William Keith, instead of being despised in this connection, would be extolled as the only Proprietary Governor who championed the rights of the People. That his words were not always true, that his debts were not always paid, that his treatment of the Penn family, or of his successor, or of James Logan was not always fair, would never have interfered. Even his advocacy of the taxation of America by Parliament, so long before the excitement upon the subject, would have been charitably regarded as VOL. XII.-1

(1)

an error of opinion. Moreover, how much soever he may have deserved the animadversions of some writers, we may be indulged with the reflection, that, had he left descendants in Pennsylvania, less would have been published against his memory, and perhaps more have been said in his favor. He was the greatest of the Lieutenant-Governors under the Penns. His administration, too, after witnessing the depression of the colony, inaugurated a prosperity which in time made Philadelphia the largest city in America. It is not our aim to exculpate his character: as to the Franklin episode, which has thrown suspicion upon all else that he did, even if he had intended to help Benjamin through Mrs. Penn and the mortgagees, and had been prevented by the quarrel over the instructions, which occurred during the preparation to sail, or if Sir William had found out more about the future philosopher, who was far from being a nice young man,-it was reprehensible not to let the change of purpose be known. Having been requested to prepare an article to accompany the picture of Sir William, we would put in print some information chiefly as to his career before and after his residence in Pennsylvania. In the first place, it is not too trivial to notice, that while, in English law, a baronet is not a nobleman, yet, as such, and even as the eldest son and expectant heir of one, Keith had a distinction above all his predecessors and successors in office (George Thomas not being so created until after his term expired), as well as above all the colonists of that time. William Penn, and after his death certain of his descendants, down to the Declaration of Independence, were the titular Governors, and those intrusted with the administration were only his or their Lieutenants, or Deputies; for which reason, and the small salary allowed to them, their position was not an attractive one to Englishmen of mark. While a cousin of the sovereign, a viscount, a general, an admiral, etc., sometimes performed similar duties in neighboring colonies directly under the Crown, nearly all of our chief magistrates were provincials or inferior military officers, and the subject of this sketch was the only one who outranked the

Penns in social precedency in the Old World. Keith was descended from the great feudal family of that name, the head of which, for about six hundred years, was Marischal to the King of Scotland, in ancient times sitting with the Constable at the monarch's right hand in the Parliament. In the fourteenth century, John Keith, younger son of Edward, the Marischal, married the heiress of Reginald Cheyne, Chamberlain of Scotland, and so acquired the barony of Innerugie, within which Peterhead now stands, and which made his descendants a powerful line. The subject of this sketch was one of the Keiths of Ludquhairn, sprung from Andrew Keith, who received that estate in 1492 from his father, Sir Gilbert Keith, then Lord of Innerugie. I have a copy of the pedigree prepared in 1760 by the Lion King at Arms for our Lieutenant-Governor's son. It is in Latin, and quite lengthy, quoting charters and other authorities; so that it cannot be embodied in this article. Suffice it to say that in 1629 Sir William Keith of Ludquhairn was created a baronet of Nova Scotia, and that his grandson, Sir William, the third baronet, married Jean, daughter and heiress of Smith of Rapness, her mother being a daughter of Patrick Graham of Inchbraikie. The Lieutenant-Governor of Pennsylvania was the son of the third baronet and his lady, and was born probably at Peterhead, where he was baptized February 16, 1680 (doubtless within a few weeks after his birth). The witnesses to his baptism were John, Earl of Erroll, and William Jameson of Balmoore. The latter may have been a relative, Balmoore, or Balmuir, having belonged to an Alexander Keith about fifty years before. The Earl of Erroll appears to have been a distant relative, his grandmother having been a daughter of Sir Patrick Cheyne of Essilmount; which estate came to the Keith family before the days of the first baronet of Ludquhairn. The Earl married the sister of that Earl of Perth who was one of the twenty-four Proprietors of East Jersey. With the three Earls, Erroll, Perth, and Marischal (head of the Keith family, and sonin-law of Perth), all of them attached to the old régime,

Sir William, the father of our Lieutenant-Governor, was intimate. From a letter of the Earl of Perth to his sister, dated June 17, 1694 (see Correspondence, published by Camden Society), we learn that the Earl Marischal, going to England, had left his property to this kinsman's management, and the Earl of Perth says, "Tell Sir William Keith (whose Scot I am and to all his family) that I hope he will be carefull of my Lord's concerns in his absence." This baronet, perhaps by his endeavors to add to the family estates, sank heavily in debt, so that at his death his creditors, in the phraseology of Scotch law, "came to a ranking." Thus his heir was dependent upon public office or his wits for support. The mother of Lady Jean Keith married for her second husband Sir Robert Moray, Kt., of Abercairny, and by him had several sons, who were thus step-uncles of the subject of this sketch. The eldest married a sister of Dr. Thomas Græme, who came to Pennsylvania with Keith. Two others became active workers in the cause of the Stuarts, one being also a lieutenant-colonel in the French service.

It would seem that through these step-uncles William Keith was sent over to St. Germain as a very young man, and there finished his education, acquiring at least a knowledge of the world and the arts of address. He was about twenty-three years of age when, Bishop Burnett ("History of his Own Times") says, "Keith had been long at that court, he had free access both to that queen and prince, and hoped they would have made him under secretary for Scotland. His uncle, too, had visited St. Germain's, was one of those most trusted there, and had been sent with Fraser to ascertain the temper of the Scotch," Fraser having reported the Highlanders ready to raise twelve thousand men in the Pretender's interest if French troops and money were sent to their assistance. From some particulars mentioned in Tindal's "Continuation of Rapin's History of England," Keith appears to have been in London in the winter of 1702-3, when Fraser was there in treaty with the Jacobites. Fraser had revealed the plot to the Duke of Queensberry,

endeavoring to criminate the Duke of Athol, and went back to St. Germain as a spy. Athol's friends discovered this, and precipitated an investigation. Fraser's correspondence was seized, and Keith and others arrested. For some time he denied that he knew anything, but afterwards confessed that he had been made acquainted with Fraser's mission to the Scotch nobility. He then undertook to induce his uncle to come and tell all he knew, and said there was no other design than to arrange that the Prince of Wales should reign after Queen Anne. Burnett adds that there was "matter of treason" sworn against Keith, but there was only one witness to it. John Moray, the uncle in question, never appeared, and the House of Lords voted that Keith had prevaricated, and was unworthy of the Queen's mercy. Burnett thought, from the ill-management of the attempt to obtain Moray's testimony, that the investigators did not sincerely wish it. Keith's narrative, which had been kept back to await the result of his negotiations with his uncle, was laid before both Houses of Parliament on February 19, 1703-4, says Luttrell's "Brief Relation of State Affairs," and the Lords appointed a committee to examine him. On April 6 he was set at liberty on condition not to depart from England without leave. He seems never again to have been molested on account of the affair, but to have earned a claim for consideration by the Jacobites when they should come to power. He married an Englishwoman, not very long after his discharge from arrest, as appears from his son Alexander, who was not his eldest, being old enough in May, 1729, to be appointed Collector of Customs. The lady's maiden name had been Ann Newbury or Newberry; she was the widow of Robert Diggs, and her daughter by her first husband was born at St. Albans in 1700. This daughter married Dr. Thomas Græme after the family came to Pennsylvania.

Of Keith's career, or even his residence at and for some time after his marriage, we are ignorant. He did not practice law, or he never would have spoken, as he did when establishing his Court of Chancery, of his "want