wife inherited the Langton estate soon afterwards, and Innes thereupon assumed by royal license the additional surname of Norcliffe; but on his wife's death without issue, on 20 July 1807, the Langton estate went to her nephew, and Innes dropped the name of Norcliffe. Eight days later he married his second wife, Harriet, daughter of Benjamin Charlewood of Windlesham, Surrey, by whom he had an only son, James Henry.
Meanwhile William Ker, fourth duke of Roxburgh, had died on 22 Oct. 1805, without surviving issue. Innes's great-grandfather, Sir James Innes, third baronet, had married in 1666 Margaret Ker, granddaughter by a second marriage of Sir Robert Ker, first earl of Roxburgh [q. v.] On the ground of this distant relationship Innes, who now called himself Innes-Ker, claimed to succeed to the dukedom and its estates. His pretensions were disputed by Lady Essex Ker, by Major-general Walter Ker of Littledean, Roxburghshire, and by John Bellenden Ker [q. v.], in whose favour the last duke had entailed the property. Lord-chancellor Eldon took three days (15, 16, and 20 June 1809) to state in the House of Lords the grounds on which he preferred Sir James Innes to the other claimants. The litigation continued till 11 May 1812, when the House of Lords finally granted the title to Innes-Ker, and in the following year the deeds by which the fourth duke had attempted to bequeath to Bellenden Ker the greater part of the property were set aside. The duke died, aged 85, at Floors, near Kelso, on 19 July 1823, and was buried in the family vault at Bowden. His widow re-married Colonel Walter Frederick O'Reilly, C.B., of the 41st regiment of foot (d. 1844), and died 19 Jan. 1855. His only son, James Henry (1816–1879), succeeded as seventh duke.
[The Familie of Innes, edited for the Spalding Club by Cosmo Innes; Douglas's Peerage; Reports of Cases decided in the House of Lords upon Appeal from Scotland, vol. v.]
KER, JOHN (1673–1726), of Kersland, Ayrshire, government spy, eldest son of Alexander Crawfurd of Fergushill, second son of John Crawfurd, seventeenth laird of Crawfurdland, by Elizabeth, daughter of John Maxwell of Southburn, was born, according to the preface to his ‘Memoirs,’ in the family house of Crawfurdland on 8 Aug. 1673. In 1693 he married Anna, the younger of two daughters of the deceased Robert Ker of Kersland. On the death of their only brother, Major Daniel Ker of the Cameronians, at the battle of Steinkirk in 1692, the estate had been settled on the elder sister Jean, married to Major William Borthwick of Johnstonburn, but in 1697 she sold it to her sister's husband, who thereupon assumed the title and arms of Ker of Kersland. Between 1689 and 1704 Ker became so overloaded with debts that he found it necessary to grant irredeemable feu charters to sundry mortgages to the extent of half the property. His impecuniosity was probably the cause of his shameless abuse of his position as the recognised leader of the Cameronians. The support of this sect being claimed both by the government and the Jacobites, he set his wits to discover how best he could prey upon both parties, or, failing this, which party he could prey upon to most advantage. Lockhart states that he tried to gain credit with the Jacobites by opposing the union (Papers, i. 302). Ker's version is that the Jacobites concealed their own intentions in favour of the Pretender, and tried to persuade the Cameronians to a rising against the union by arguments suited to the principles of the sect (Memoirs, 1726, pt. i. p. 28). He moreover affirms that against his own conviction he was so beguiled by ‘the rhetorical’ (a gloss for pecuniary) ‘arguments’ of the Duke of Queensberry, that he cajoled the Cameronians into peace (ib. pp. 30–4). He professes deeply to regret his action in favour of the union (ib. p. 37). At the same time he naïvely confesses that his main motive was an assurance of the queen's favour from the duke.
Immediately after the union he says that he was sounded by some Jacobite agents as to his ‘terms.’ Feigning to take the bait, he endeavoured to gain their confidence in order to betray them. That he was simply a government spy may be held as proved, if we accept as genuine the royal license of 7 July 1707 (printed as a frontispiece to his Memoirs), permitting him to associate with disaffected persons. He boasts that he had spies and agents in all parts of the country. Lockhart affirms that, as ‘Ker was known to be a person highly immoral and guilty of several base actions, such as forgery and the like, no person of the least note would have the least intercourse with him’ (Papers, i. 302). This is partly confirmed by the Hooke ‘Correspondence,’ as is also the statement that ‘his chief correspondence was with the Duchess of Gordon and some catholic priests.’ He figures in the ‘Correspondence’ under the names of Thomas Trustie, Wilks, Wicks, and the ‘Cameronian mealmonger.’ On 20 April 1707 Mr. Strachan, a catholic gentleman, treated with him as representing the Cameronians of five shires. Ker in their name offered thirteen thousand men for the king's service, and volunteered to go to France and remain there as a hostage for the fidelity of his party (Hooke, p. 309). Strachan also gave
