St Peter’s Church, Sandwick
by James Irvine and Victoria Collison-Owen*
(From The Orcadian dated July 11, 2002)

St Peter's Church, Sandwick, just after the renewal of its roof around 1907. (Photo courtesy of Orkney Photographic Archives.)

The Scottish Redundant Churches Trust has begun the refurbishment of the former parish church of Sandwick.

The building is representative of the solid, unadorned, unpretentiousness of the many hundreds of Presbyterian kirks that once existed throughout the country, but which have now succumbed to time and change.

Situated on the west coast of the Orkney Mainland and looking out towards the spectacular Bay of Skaill and the World Heritage Site of Skara Brae, St Peter’s is a Category A listed former parish church dating from 1836.

Its survival is little short of miraculous: not only has it sat empty and exposed to the worst of the Atlantic storms after the congregation moved to Quoyloo church many years ago, but in 1839, the minister of the parish of Sandwick, the Reverend Charles Clouston, wrote of his new church:

Clouston had little, if anything, good to say about his church, but he reserved special criticism for its location which he described as:

In fact, decisions on whether to repair the old building or construct a new one, its location and size, and various associated funding issues had led to six years of wrangling and discontent. The issues are graphically documented in the minutes of the Presbytery of Cairston and the Kirk Session.

These records paint a fascinating picture of the frequent and bitter clashes between heritors seeking to limit their expenditure, parishioners split into factions, a minister determined to maintain his authority, and a presbytery struggling to keep order between all parties.

The origins of the parish church of Sandwick go much further back than the 19th century. It is probable that the site held a religious significance from as early as the 8th century. The earliest reference to the parish of Sandwick was in 1327/8, and to a church there in 1544. The oldest surviving relic is the 1623 gravestone to Jane, daughter of George Graham, Bishop of Orkney. The church was rebuilt in the 1670s by Bishop Andrew Honyman, and again in 1767.

In 1771, St Peter’s was put to an unusual use:

Repairs to St Peter’s were carried out in the 1780s and 1792, but calls for further repairs in 1819 and 1830 were deferred owing to the age and infirmity of the minister of the combined parishes of Sandwick and Stromness, William Clouston. His death in 1832, at the age of 85, triggered the disjunction of the parishes and the new minister, William’s son Charles, then needed a new manse.

It was not until March 1834 that the presbytery of Cairston minutes record the following:

In response to his petition, Reverend Clouston is instructed to ‘summon tradesmen of different crafts’ to report on the condition of the church and make recommendations for its repair.

July 2, 1834 : The Presbytery of Cairston gather at St Peter’s together with a number of the heritors of the parish and two tradesmen, James Sinclair, mason, and William Hervey, wright and glazier. Sinclair and Hervey report on the state of the church. They find that the present church is 58 feet 9 inches long, 17 feet 6 inches wide and 10 feet 11 inches high within the walls.

They pronounce the walls to be straight and apparently strong, but the slate work ruinous and requiring replacement. In addition, they find that some pews are in poor condition and that the whole building is badly lit. Although they are prepared to make various suggestions, by way of repair and enlargement, they add caveats that then render their suggestions impractical, for widening the church would, in their opinion, cause the roof to collapse. They conclude that:

This report is countered by John Robertson on behalf of 14 heritors who claim that to alter the position of the church or to build a new one “was unnecessary”, and advocate repairs and increasing the number of sitters from 250 to 350. They obtain a report from two other tradesmen who were:

The Presbytery meeting adjourns in the face of this “considerable division of opinion”. On the one side is the new minister, aged 34, whose manse was two miles from the church, and the many parishioners who lived up to five miles inland; on the other is William Watt Esq. of Skaill House nearby, aged 58, laird of the Breckness Estate which extends over about a third of the parish, and many of the 58 heritors of the parish who would have to bear all the costs of a new church, on top of the cost of new manse, a new school and of the concurrent division of the townlands of the parish.

July 16, 1834: A further petition is received from yet another group of heritors, led by Thomas Redland. They are against repair on the grounds of the inadequate size and inconvenient location of the present church. They allege it is so small that some families with a right to eight or more seats are only able to have two and that “a considerable portion even of those who have seats are unable to travel so far in coarse weather over wet ground”. Furthermore, they claim they have laboured long under very great inconvenience in consequence of the ruinous and dangerous state of the Church of Sandwick had been in for many years, the roof, doors and windows admitting the wind and rain too freely. Worse still, they maintain that the condition of the church is now placing the congregation at risk, mentioning that:

Clouston is directed to again find tradesmen to report on the state of the church, this time “minutely”. A report on the structure adjacent to the church, known as “the aisle”, a separate building used as a family burial place by the principal heritors, the Watts of Breckness, is also requested to establish whether it can be used for additional seating.

September 1834: Further controversy arises. Watt strenuously objects to any consideration of the aisle being incorporated into the church. He claims it as private property, adding that “since time immemorial” it has been the burial place of his family, “occupied for some 200 years, never with any seats”. Watt’s protests are ignored and a further report by Sinclair and Hervey is heard.

They estimate the aisle could accommodate 48 people in eight pews; however, it is in poor condition with the roof in as bad a state as the main church and the west wall “shot and cracked in two places”. They suggest that the aisle could be taken down and rebuilt to the north and the church refitted accordingly, all for the sum of £236. As an alternative, they give assurances that a new church could be built for a mere £250.

The next day Watt is told that his claim on the aisle is dismissed due to lack of proof of ownership. The Presbytery conclude that the condition of the church aside, it could never accommodate all those entitled to a seat, estimated at some 544, half of the parish population of 1,088, and they therefore issue a decree condemning the building. (In fact the population in 1831 was only 973). The heritors are instructed to lodge a plan for a new church at the next meeting, and Clouston is directed to apply to His Majesty’s Commissioner of Woods and Forests for ground near the centre of the parish on which to build a new church.

Four heritors, led by Watt, immediately lodge a furious protest to this decree, alleging that no conclusive evidence had been provided to justify the demolition of the church on the grounds of safety. They maintain that such a decree is premature since no evidence has been provided as to the true cost of building a new church. They accuse Sinclair and Hervey of being both vague and contradictory to their previous report. In response to their protest, the Presbytery appoint a committee to look into the allegations.

November 1834: Watt and his fellow supporters (now only three in number) try a different approach. They ask the Presbytery to allow two full years to elapse after the building of the new manse (1833), before placing a further burden on the heritors with the construction of a new church. The Presbytery summarily dismisses the plea and instructs the heritors to produce a plan without delay to put before the committee appointed to oversee the building of the new church.

February 1835: The committee have still received no plan from the heritors and take matters into their own hands by commissioning Nicol Irvine and Magnus Smith to produce a plan for a larger church. Meanwhile the Presbytery are advised that no reply has yet been received from the Commissioner of Woods and Forests about the grant of land for a new church.

March 1835: The committee receive the heritors’ plan but find it unacceptable on a number of fronts. Firstly, the number of seats has been exaggerated. And secondly, there is no precedent for external stairs to the galleries; these, they allege “would, unless roofed in, be attended with great inconvenience and risk”. The committee put forward their own amended version of Irvine and Smith’s plan, “desirous to fall in as far as possible with the wishes of the Heritors”. This altered plan places the external stairs within an enlarged building and increases the seating capacity to 556.

The Presbytery approve the committee’s amendments to the heritors’ plan in principle, but with a view to further reducing costs, refer it to Sinclair and Hervey for further amendment so it will contain exactly 544 seats, allowing exactly 18 inches of seating for each member of the congregation, excepting those seats of the minister and elders. This plan is to be lodged within 14 days.

April 1835: The Presbytery reconvene to inspect Sinclair and Hervey’s plan. A sketch of the church is presented, accompanied by specifications. These include very detailed measurements of all aspects of the building, with particular attention to the pews and pulpit. Seating is to be of “good American timber if it can be got”. Construction of the galleries is to utilise an ingenious technique:

The Presbytery approve the plan and instructs Sinclair and Hervey to prepare relevant cost estimates for inspection at the next meeting.

The location of the new church continues to be a subject for discussion and conflicting petitions.

July 1835: Clouston reports that no reply has been received from the Commissioner of Woods and Forests in respect of a new site for the church. The Presbytery agree regretfully that the building of the new church must be delayed, not only to allow more time for a site to be found, but also because of a lack of time before the onset of bad weather. They resolve that work will begin early in the spring of 1836. Sinclair and Hervey neglect to attend with their requested estimate, and are instructed to attend the next meeting without fail.

September 1835: Sinclair and Hervey again fail to appear with their estimate. They are instructed to attend the next meeting. It is reported that the Commissioner of Woods and Forests regrets land cannot be granted for the new church without an Act of Parliament. The Clerk to the Presbytery is instructed to send an earnest entreaty to His Majesty’s Commissioner reiterating the urgent reasons for a site for a new church.

November 1835: Sinclair and Hervey attend and submit an estimate of £437.12.5d for the building of the new church, the accuracy of which they are solemnly sworn to. No response has been received from His Majesty’s Commissioner following the earlier entreaty. Clouston petitions the Presbytery, requesting that the heritors complete the work begun on his manse almost three years earlier. He complains that they have failed to respond to his frequent requests and he is therefore reluctantly “compelled to bring the inconvenience to which he is exposed before the Reverend court.”

January 1836: At a meeting of all the heritors, called by Clouston and chaired by Watt, a motion that “if a new church be built, that it be built where it is or in its immediate vicinity” is carried by 45 votes to 14.

February 1836: At the next Presbytery meeting Clouston does not report the heritors’ meeting but instead presents a Petition signed by 387 heritors and parishioners of Sandwick asking that the Presbytery take “the proper steps for having a new church erected without delay”. They present a subscription raised amongst them to aid the construction of the church “in a centrical situation”.

March 1836: Disagreement arises over the assessment of the heritors for their shares of the cost of building the new church. The Collector of Cess states: “The valuation of Sandwick I sent you will not answer as a rule for Parochial Assessments, and I am very sorry that I have no means of furnishing any other.” Finally, after prolonged discussion, a method of division agreeable to the majority is decided upon and the cost of the new church apportioned between the Crown and 58 heritors.

There is still no response from the Commissioner of Woods and Forests, or from the Chamberlain of the Crown Lands about the granting of land for the church. With great regret, the Presbytery conclude there is no other option but to settle on the rebuilding of the church on the old site.

June 1836: In accordance with the Presbytery’s instructions, the old church is demolished, the site cleared and materials salvaged for reuse in order to minimise cost.

Externally, the new church took the form of a plain, harled rectangle, roofed with Orkney flagstone and surmounted at the west gable by a sturdy bellcote with a ball finial. Internally, the space was dominated by the towering pulpit on the south wall, rising to an extraordinary height that placed the minister on a level with the gallery. Immediately below the pulpit and at a lower level was the precentor’s desk, and below this again, a raised seating area for the Elders. Seating, both on the ground floor and in the U-shaped gallery, was arranged to maximise capacity and to focus attention on the pulpit. Natural light was maximised through two large round-headed windows flanking the pulpit with smaller sash-and-case windows to east and west on ground and first floor level in the southern wall. It was the eastern windows which later created the problems noted by Clouston, and clearly the combination of underlying soft sand and uneven settlement on the old foundations caused significant structural weakness.

These were not the only difficulties arising with the new building. In 1839, the Presbytery were called upon to mediate in further disputes between the minister and the heritors. Over a period of two days, the Presbytery heard evidence as to the siting of the new church, and whether it conformed to their exact specification laid down in March 1836. Clouston also reported that he was unable to attest to the accuracy of the accounts associated with the building of the new church “while doubts existed in his mind as to the correctness of some facts alleged.” The Presbytery concluded that there had been “considerable deviation” from the specifications and they found themselves unable to “declare the Church of Sandwick sufficient, nor built upon the site fixed upon by the Presbytery.”

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that in the same year, when Clouston was called upon to write the entry for the Parish of Sandwick in the New Statistical Account, his dissatisfaction and exasperation with St Peter’s were clearly apparent. Every aspect of his new church had been fraught with controversy and dispute: from its repair or rebuilding and its size and location to the quality of the finished structure and the accounting and division of its cost. Even the final cost, quoted by Sinclair and Hervey, and sworn on oath as amounting to no more than £438 was recorded in 1838 to have risen to an estimated £633, and in 1841 to £704, although when Clouston eventually signed the accounts a drawback of £89 of customs and excise duties was recovered. Disputes over the apportionment of the costs amongst the Crown and 58 heritors were not resolved until 1840.

Further problems arose. In 1839 the heritors claimed the church had seating for only 553 persons and requested that two services be held on Sundays. Clouston claimed there was seating for 564, and suggested instead that the church be extended. The overcrowding was eventually resolved by the Disruption of 1843. And then, in January 1847, another crack appeared in one of the walls. Surveyors’ reports, estimates and petitions proliferated, Clouston enjoying the further opportunity to relocate his church. In March:

In June the Presbytery instructed repairs, but subject to the heritors pledging that as soon as any flaws appeared they will, without delay, build a new church on a central site and a secure foundation.

Clouston remained minister until his death in 1884, but must have been a very disillusioned man.

A stove installed during the 1870s was removed in 1907, when the paraffin lamps were fitted. Around this time the original roof of local slates was replaced by the present Welsh slates. The “harmonium” dates from 1920, when it cost £15.10s.

Deserted and forlorn, and despite Clouston’s dire predictions, St Peter’s has weathered the years of neglect extraordinarily well. When acquired by The Scottish Redundant Churches Trust (SRCT) in 1998, although in need of major repairs, the building was structurally sound, dry, and rot-free; most importantly, it was largely intact. The building today is much as Clouston would have known it 160 years ago, except for some minor internal alterations. The interior will enable the modern-day visitor to experience the atmosphere and arrangement of a 19th century church, deliberately devoid of any ornament or decoration that might distract either eye or mind from the all-important Word. From its upright, perch-like pews with their 18-inch seating allowance, to the deadening chill of the unheated space, this is a Presbyterian kirk in its severest form.

The extensive repair work now under way – a nine-month programme – is supported by the Heritage Lottery Fund, Historic Scotland, Orkney Islands Council, Orkney Enterprise, the General Trustees of the Church of Scotland, and the Architectural Heritage Fund. When this work is completed, The SRCT intend the church to be open and accessible all year round. With Skara Brae so close, and attracting in excess of 50,000 visitors every year, it might be tempting to create some theme park religious ‘experience’. This is not the intention. The SRCT are well aware of the heritage value of St Peter’s and its unique position as one of the country’s least-altered parish churches of its date. In accordance with the SRCT’s policies, St Peter’s will remain a functioning, but sleeping church, a quiet place where time has stood still. Occasional services will be held there, not for tourists to see what a quaint Scots kirk might have been like, but for local people whose ancestors worshipped at St Peter’s before them. The SRCT hope to form a Friends’ Group to help foster local involvement.

A range of circumstances have enabled St Peter’s to survive the passage of time unscathed, while many hundreds of other churches have succumbed to modernisation. A remote location with a slower pace of change and limited funds meant that ‘improvements’ were minimal and the nineteenth century character of the building remained largely unaltered. Clouston may not have valued his church highly nor placed any faith in its longevity, but today it is considered one of the outstanding Scottish churches of its time, and its future survival is now secure. A strange paradox indeed.

*Director, The Scottish Redundant Churches Trust, who will be pleased to provide further information (tel. 01555 666023).
*Copies of a more detailed version of this paper, with full references, will be held at the Skara Brae Visitor Centre and the Orkney Archives.
Acknowledgement is given to the owners of the records used in this paper - the Orkney Archives, the National Archives of Scotland, and Major Malcolm Macrae.