ROMANTIC PEERAGE CLAIMS.

Otago Witness, Issue 2817, 4 March 1908, Page 78

ROMANTIC PEERAGE CLAIMS.

(By EL G. Archek.)

It would be impossible for the most fertile bram to imagine more extraordinary and romantic incidents than, many of those -which have been disclosed in prosaic courts of law during the hearing of claini3 put forward by men to the rank and dignity of a British peerage. Here are some remarkable cases. Concerning the Earldom of Anglesey, when it was held by the Annesleys, there is an extraordinary history, which at least two novelists have utilised for the purposes of fiction — Scott in "Guy Mannering" and Charles Reade in his "Wandering Heir." At the beginning of the reign of George I there dwelt in Ireland a dissolute, spendthrift nobleman, Lord Altham, grandson and heir of the first Ea-rl of Anglesey. Lord Altham was man-ied to a natural daughter of the Duke of Buckham, but he \uis suspected of carrying on an intrigue v ith a peasant woman at nis gates, known as "Juggy" Landy. In the year 1715 <i son, James Annesley, was born to his Icrdship. After the death of Lady Altham tbe widower took up with another mistrees, who, it is suggested, alienated the father's affection by persuading him that his son was illegitimate. The boy, left to himself, rambled about the country, and at one time was protected by a butcher. In 1727 Lord Altham died, and was succeeded by his brother Richard, aftsrwards Earl of Anglesey, in spite ot reports of the existence of a legitimate son. In order to guard against inconvenient mquiriis the uncle eventually kidnapped his reputed nephew and shipped him to America, where he was sold for a common slave. The youth remained en the plantations till 1740, when, his Urm of slavery having expired, he enlisted as a seaman on board one of Admiral Vernon's frigates, and was brought b«ck to England. During the voyage he disclosed his. identity, and his story to impressed his shipmates that the Admil al and officers of the fleet subscribed together to support his romantic claim. With the money thus acquired he brought an action of ejectment against his uncle, now in possession of the Irish estates. When the suit was impending, however, the uncle made overtures for effecting a compromise, but the negotiations were broken off in consequence of the following occurrence: — On May 1, 1742, Annesley, while out shooting at Staines with a gamekeeper, had an affray with a poacher, whom he shot dead. Lord Anglesey promptly instructed an attorney to prosecute the claimant for murder, and was heard to say that he would spend £10,000 if need be to hang his nephew. But Annesley was acquitted of the charge. After his trial he journeyed to Ireland, where he experienced another disagreeable adventure. Attending the Curragh races, he met his uncle and a party of friends, who, directly they caught siglit of the claimant, savage^ assaulted him, co that he narrowly escaped with his life. The great trial began, on May 11, 1743, j and lasted the unprecedented' period of 15 days. The point a-t issue simply was whether Lady Altham or "Juggy" Landy was the plaintiff's mother, and the evidence was of a_ most contradictory character. While one side swore that the woman Landy had fulfilled the duties of a midwife, and that the christening of the child was attended by bonfires and other rejoicings among the tenantry in honour of the birth of an heir, the other brought evidence to prove that Lady Altham never had a child. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, but James Annesley was unable to raise the funds necessary to prosecute the case further, aaid died in 1760, after having been twice married, and leaving several sons, all of whom died a few year& later without issue. The Earl of Anglesey continued in the enjoyment of Ids titles and estates- till bis death in 1761. His countess, who was said to- be an ale-house keeper's daughter, claimed* the Irish titles of Viscount Valentia and. Baron Mountnw>rre6 for her sou Arthur, which were disputed by a kinsman, on the score of illegitimacy. Nevertheless, Arthur Annesley succeeded, and took his seat in the Irish House of Lords. But when in 1766 he came of age, and claimed the English Earldom of Anglesey, the Committee of Privileges proved his prefeasions to be utterly false. It transpired that his mother was not married till 1752, though she eaid she had gone through «, secret ceremony in 1741, and the English peerage became extinct. When George Lindsay Crawford, twentysecond Earl of Crawfoid, died ■unmarried in 1808, he was succeeded in his great possessions by a sister, Lady Mary, at whose demise the entailed estates were bound to go to her cousin, the Earl of Glasgow. Within two years of the death of the last Earl of Crawford of the Lindsay branch, an individual styling himself John Crawford landed in Ayr from Ireland, and claimed the family honours and estates as a diescendant of the Hon. James Lindsay Crawford, a younger son of the family, who many years previously had mysteriously disappeared. Acting upon "information received," the claimant went to explore the ruins of Kilbirnie Castle, an old family seat, which had been i burned down, and here he discovered a rare prize — namely, a mass of family | papers, which during the fire bad been deposited for safety in an outhouse and forgotten. Among these papers* he found) many letters by his reputed ancestor to various members of the family, written after his disappearance from Scotland. The claimant had some unscrupulous accomplices, who tempted him into fabricating additions, in exact imitation of the old hand, to suit his story. The ancestor wa6 made to describe his position and circumstances in Ireland, his marriage, the * "Historical Essays and Studies." By Lord Acton. (Klacmillan.)

birth of children, etc. Fortified with alt * this- spurious matter, the claimant in 1810 formally entered a claim, for. the title and estates. The success of his; suit seemeH assured, whan his. accomplices-, failing- to obtain his compliance' with certain ex-orbi-tant demands, approached 1 the defendant, Lady Mary, and. sold her the forged and vitiated documents-; whereupon Crawford was arrested- on. a charge of forgery, and was tried, convicted,, and sentenced to transportation, in 1812. Strange to relate^ t however, the exposure was followed by a remarkable revulsion of public feeling. Great sympathy was extended towards the convict, inasmuch as it was generally belieA'ed, that he had been innocently betrayed by his accomplices, who were in the pay of Lady Mary's agents, and' that these latter had forged the documents without his knowledge, in order to accomplish his ruin. Notwithstanding the forgeries there was a great mass of other evidence highly favourable to the claimant's pretensions. In 1823 the prisoner returned from serving his sentence in New South Wales, and immediately renewed proceedings- in furtherance of his claims. He was now warmly supported by the nobility and public, both a 6 an innocent and injured man, and the rightful heir to ancient honours and rich estates. He was commonly addressed by his assumed title of Earl of Crawford and Lindsay, a,nd in his titular capacity he was on two occasions allowed to vote at an election of Scottish peers. Thousands of pounds were subscribed and expended on the collection of evidence, and the case was on the point of being brought before the House of Lords when the claimant suddenly died. More delay ensued, and additional expense was Incurred in finding the claimant's son, who lived abroad, and when he at last arrived in. Scotland bonds like those in the Druce case- "were issued and eagerly subscribed for. ; In 1833 Lady Mary died, and her sue- j cessor to- the entailed estates, Lord Glasgow, behaved with striking chivalry. He gave the new claimant free access to all his family papers in order to substantiate his claim. But the case never came before the House of Lords. At the last moment the opinion of the most eminent Scottish counsel of the day was taken by the trustees of the claim, and the opinion of the former, pronounced in 1839, was altogether adverse — -to quote their Very words, "any further inquiry is perfectly hopeless and unnecessary." Since that date no further steps have been taken to advance this extraordinary suit. Briefly put, the case for the claimant was that the Hon. John Lindsay Crawford had settled in Ireland, aaid died there, leaving a family, between the years 17651770. On the other side, the representatives of the late Earl asserted that this Mr Crawford died a bachelor in London in 1745, and was buried in the church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields. The parish registers testified to the truth of the burial, while it was also a fact that no genuine letters written by Ma % Crawford subsequent to the year 1745 could be produced. That the claimant's ancestor was settled in Ireland, and believed himself to be son of Lord Crawford, and that members of his family visited the noble family in Scotland, there can be no possible doubt. Therefore, the roost likely solution of the mystery is that the Crawford in Ireland was an illegitimate brother of the Earl. Lord Glasgow allowed the body of the original claimant to be buried in the family mauecleuni alongside Ihe remains of his alleged cousin and old antagonist, the Lady Mary Lindsay Crawford. The several claims to the Berkeley peerage arose under the following circumstances. Frederick Augustus, fifth Earl of Berkeley, went through; the ceremony of marriage with Mary Cole at Lambeth on May 1(y, 1796, having, as he and his wife subsequently alleged, been previously married to her ait Berkeley Castle, Gloucestershire, on. March 30, 1785. Between these dates Lady Berkeley had been known as Mis* Tudor, and th» -alleged Berkeley marriage had been kept secret. Four sons were- bo.ro before the Berkeley marriage, of whom, the two eldest were William (Fitz-Haafdinge (created Boron Serave in 1831 and Earl FitzHardinge in. 1841) and Maurice Frederic- Fitz>Ha-rdinge (a distinguished admiral, created Baron FitzHardinge in 1861). In 1799 William Fitz-Hardinge obtained leave to lay his pedigree before the Committee- of Privileges, of the House of Lords, and in 1801 he instituted a suit to perpetuate testmony, and after his father's death in 1810 he' claimed to be summoned to the House of Lords as Earl of Berkeley. In this suit his claim was rejected, the Lords holding that the Berkeley marriage was not then proved. In 1828 he made a claim, which was also unsuccessful, to be summoned to the House of Lords as Baron Berkeley, basing his claim on his tanure of Berkeley Cattle. A similar claim was made in 1858 by Maurice Frederic Fitz-Hardinge, who had succeeded to the Berkeley estates on the death of his brother, but he failed! to establish it. Thomas Moreton FitzHardinge, the eldest of the sons of the fifth Earl born after the Lambeth marriage, who had never assumed the title of Earl of Berkeley, died unmarried" in 1882, and the barony of Berkeley devolved upon his niece, only child of the third son of the fifth Earl born after the Lambeth marriage. In 1890 the earldom was successfully claimed by Randal Thomas Mowbray, a. descendant of the fourth Earl. This claim was opposed by Lord FitzHardinge, son of the first baron, and another attempt was made to establish the alleged Berkeley marrjtage of the fifth Earl. As the present Lord Fitz-Hardinge (the third baron) appears to be the last repre- | sentative issue of the fifth Earl born prior to the Lambeth marriage, it is unlikely that there will ever again be a Tecrudes- ' cence of this famous dispute. i The Earldom of Devon had been dor- ' mant for 265 years when it was revived in March, 1831, after a long inves Libation, ia favour of William, Lord Courtonay, uf Powderham Castle, as a descendant of Henry de Courtenay, second of the old

earfec The last Earl' of the original' crea* tion died unmarried in Italy in 1556. His large estates passed into other families, ■while in consequence of the limitations of th 6 patent not being known, fche honours passed into such hopeless- abeyance that! the earldom, and subsequently the dukedom, of Devonshire, 'held to be at the free disposal of the Crown, was bestowed! by James I on the head of- the house of Cavendish. Towaids the end of the reign of' George* IV a claim to the ancient earldom, was successfully pieferred by William, third Viscount Courtenay. The new Eaib was an eccentric and self-indulgent individual, who had long resided in Paris. He ia said never to have crossed the doors o£ the House of Lords, although he spent 60 much labour and money in prosecuting hia preferment. He died a. few years la<ter, when the viscounty became "extinct, but the earldom passed to a cousin. The curious, plaintive motto, "Übi lapsus? Quid feci?" ("Where have I fallen? What have I done?") ia said to have been adopted by the Powderham Courtena-ys at the time of the misfortunes of the elder branch; Perhaps the strangest case of a. successful claim to a- peerage is that of Captain Hans (Francis Hastings, R.N., to the .ancient earldom of Huntingdon. On the death of the tenth Earl in 1789 the title was deemed extinct, while the estates passed to the deceased's elder sister,, thai Countess of Moira, who by her marriage had carried the ancient baronies of Hast* ings into the Rawdon family. When the romantic story opens Captain Hastings was an unassuming retired naval officer, aged 38, who had just been given the post of ordnance storeeeger in the town of Enniskillen, Ireland. The captaini had only his pay of £150 a. year on which' to support a wife and family, so .-he had! pei force to live in a very small way ia J a humble cottage. Beyond some vagua i traditions handed down by a father (who had burned all family papers in a. fit o£ injMmit}-), to the effect that his was af remote branch of the noble house of Hastings, our ex-naval officer had no reason! to believe himself -connected with the aristocracy. His wonderful transforma-. tion within the period of little more than a year to purple robes, an Earl's coronet, and rich estates was brought about by a' chance meeting with a little Irish attorneyand enthusiastic genealogist, by name Nugent Bell. The two met out snipeshooting, and, becoming intimate, the captain told the solicitor of an unpleasant}, fracas with a neighbouring nobleman 1 which he had recently experienced, originating in his having inadvertently shot al fox. Incensed at the act, the noble; personage had' made use of unwarrantable! language, such a 6 the captain could nofc 1 tolerate. The latter Called out his insuiter, but the noble party scornfully refused a meeting on the ground that the challenger was of lowly birth. This fresht affront rankled more than the previous one, and, in speaking- of it, the captain made mention of the family tradition which assigned him relationship to &» earl. Bell, who had heard of the extinction of the Earldom of Huntingdon, eagerly took' up the scanty threads of the reputed connection, and asked if ho might investigate the affair on his own responsibility and. at his own risk. Captain Hastings wrote a letter of acquiescence, but added .as al postscript, " Great Heavens, man, you are mad !" The Irish solicitor' started- on his errand in August, 1817, first visiting Citstle Donnington, Leicestershire, the ancient family seat, where lived the Countess of Moira.! Here he met with a chilling reception. He was regarded as an adventurer, and! every kind of obstacle against his gleaning any information was forthcoming. Further investigations in the localityproved equally unsatisfactory, bat valuable information was. at last obtained from an accidental rencontre- wifchvao- old'domestic of the family. While seated on the outside of a coach travelling through I^eicestershiTe, and just, he says, as his "spirits were about tp go to pieces amidst the quicksands of disappointment, a flag hove in sight which I hastened to hail." The coach overtook a market cart, in which was seated an old woman. Some mysterious intuition impelled the solicitor to stare at her, and next somethinig written in her countenance compelled- him to* leave the coach, and, on the ptea of the heat and dust, ask her if he might occupy, a spare chair in her cart. This old crone, extraordinary to relate, turned out to be an ancient dependent of the Hastings family, and on her garrulity Bell founded! the basis of his future success. They first had some desultory conversation on the weather, the crops, and the state of the poor. From these commonplace topics- the attorney led her insensibly to discues the families of distinction residine along the route, and then casually asked her if Leicester was not the county famous for having given birth to the illustrious house of Hastings, Earls of Huntingdon. "S-carce had I pronounced the name ere I found it was a chord I might touch till Doomsday without tiring her patience." She gave the required clue, and Bell pursued it indefatigably through, churches and churchyards, examining sextons, consulting registers, poring o.v.er musty wills, deciphering tombstones, until at length he was enabled to dxaw tfp tfucb a case as produced from Sir Samuel 1 Romilly a satisfactory opinion, in favour of his claim, and a report from the Attor-ney-general to the effect that the claimant had made out his rjght as. a lawful dff^scendant from Francis Hastings, second Earl of Huntingdon (the father of the celebrated beauty. Lady Mary Hastings, whom s Tsar of Russia wanted to mary), who had died so long ago a 6 1561. On January 7, 1819. a year and a-half after Bell had started on his Quixotic quest of a peerage, a writ was delivered 1 to the retired naval officer, in which the Kirn? addr<>sse4 him as "our right trusty and entirely beloved cousin," and commnnd^d Ms attendance in the ensuing Parliament by the style, title, and dignity

of "the Right. Honourable the Earl of ■Huntingdon." The town of Enniskillen feted the ordnance ■storekeeper with bonfires, and was *drunk for a week. The new Earl made a triumphal progress -round the family estates, which were eventually restored to him, and the Irish solicitor blossomed forth into an opulent legal luminary. — The Grand Magazine.