because he ‘had been neglectful of public ordinances’. In 1860 he was ad-

monished for drunkenness, and as he had been found guilty of drunkenness

before, he was suspended from communion, and in 1863 he was suspended

indefinitely for drinking.

In 1858 ‘several people spoke of the scandal which was caused by reports

regarding acts of intemperance on the part of John Clement’. Several weeks

later Mr. Clement appeared before the Session and admitted the charge but

demanded to know who had told the minister. He was refused their names,

and when he asked for his certificate of membership that, too, was refused.

‘He then absented himself from his own place of worship for nine Sabbaths

in succession’. He again demanded his certificate, but rumours had reached

the Session that Mr. Clement had been attending the Established Church.

‘He was asked to appear at the next Session meeting and a citation was to be

served on him by the Church Officer’. Mr. Clement did appear and admitted

that he had been guilty of intemperance. He was admonished and the minister

said a prayer for him. He was told that he must be suspended from com-

munion ‘for the present’. That was in January, 1859 and in the following

April he sent a letter to the Session:—

‘To the Moderator and remnant members of the Free Church Congregation

at Strathkinness

Gentlemen,

After mature deliberation my wife and I think it proper to leave the

Free Church. 1 have therefore respectfully to request that you remove my

name from the Communion Roll.

etc.,

James Clement’.

In 1889 one young woman could not be admonished ‘as she is residing out

of this neighbourhood’ and the Session ‘found they could do nothing at the

present’. Usually, a church would pass on to another church in the parish,

where the ‘offender’ had gone, information about the ‘offender’, so that he or

she could be dealt with by one or other of the churches. In this case, it may

be that they did not know just where the young woman had gone.

Even as late as 1905 it was reported ‘it is agreed to withhold Mr. John

Robertson’s communion card pending rumours of a breach of Church discipline’.

In almost all the cases of admonishment and punishment the person con-

cerned expressed sorrow and a willingness and desire to behave better in the

future, as for example, Isabella Johnson in 1884 ‘expressed deep sorrow and a

resolve to walk henceforth through divine grace in newness of life’, and after

30