Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

A friend of mine has always said that he could well inherit a Royal Title and that if they didn't change the rules, he and his Malaysian wife could sit in the House of Lords.
His father was visiting this week so I decided to investigate further, to be told that it was true, and that there was good reason to believe that he, the father, was heir to the title of Earl of Fitzwilliam, currently extinct. If this were proved, my friend, as eldest son, would inherit.
However, because the father is now 85 and not in the best of health, and the family seat had been sold, he saw little point in pursuing the matter. He thought that one of his sons might take up the baton, but he really wasn't interested.
It made me wonder what others would do?

jhopgood wrote:A friend of mine has always said that he could well inherit a Royal Title and that if they didn't change the rules, he and his Malaysian wife could sit in the House of Lords.
there was good reason to believe that he, the father, was heir to the title of Earl of Fitzwilliam, currently extinct. If this were proved, my friend, as eldest son, would inherit.
However, because the father is now 85 and not in the best of health, and the family seat had been sold, he saw little point in pursuing the matter. He thought that one of his sons might take up the baton, but he really wasn't interested.
It made me wonder what others would do?

If there is an heir then the title is not extinct; it is merely that nobody has approached the Garter King of Arms to claim the title.

I can't see earls being allowed to sit in the House of Lords much longer - they seem to have chucked out a lot already and I suspect that when the present ones die off their successors wil not be allowed in (but things can change).

We have a neighbour here who, in his cups, claims to be a Lord. Yes, he is one but only through surname! ISTR there was a good jazz musician whose first name was Earl. Even if that is not the case I young Jamaican I know does bear the first name "Earl". There are people who have an acknowledged right to use hereditary titles but have relatively mundane jobs like bus driver etc. So, the name means little these days.

I can see that, with clever marketing and careful planning, a nice living could be made out of the title; being the guest of honour at American, perhaps even Japanese dinners etc. where real Olde English Lords, Earls etc are de rigeur at your dinner table. OK so you might not do quite as well as Fergie but the path has already been mapped out. Unfortunately an Earldom cannot be sold like a Lord of the Manor.

Otherwise I can't see too much point in all the hassle. An adopted relative was given a knighthood but never ever uses the title - I know it is a throw-away society but the things they are giving away these days begger belief.

.

I'd fight to the bitter end.

It's part of our British heritage.

I'd make a small effort, write a letter or two, but I wouldn't spend any serious money on it.

sejintenej wrote:I can see that, with clever marketing and careful planning, a nice living could be made out of the title; being the guest of honour at American, perhaps even Japanese dinners etc. where real Olde English Lords, Earls etc are de rigeur at your dinner table. OK so you might not do quite as well as Fergie but the path has already been mapped out. Unfortunately an Earldom cannot be sold like a Lord of the Manor.

I'd quite enjoy the situation out of historical and traditional interest. There might be some sort of worthwhile occupation to be explored?

But the hideous thought of being guest of honour at American or Japanese dinners - never, never, never! What could be more deadly dull and fake than enduring that sort of thing? I can almost hear the tinkle of elaborate china and glass. Grim.

An interesting by rather useless bit of information.

On the death of an aged Aunt, I inherited a lot of information on the Rutley family tree, going back to the 1600's.

ALL women of the Rutley family have a crest/coat of arms, which they are entitled to wear on their left sleeve and on vehicles of transport, (presumably carriages in the good old days !)

I have a copy of it sitting in front of me.

J.R. wrote:I'd fight to the bitter end.

It's part of our British heritage.

But isn't that the very point that David was making? (Or rather the opposite perhaps...) These days, it's not so much the 'noble' line of your family, reaching back to the days when you bought your title and land by going off to fight in the Crusades, etc., as the political party you support...?

Does the fact that an ordinary working man (like most of us) turns out to be the long lost 16xgreat grandson of the Duke of Wherevershire, all of whose other (usually male) descendants have died off, automatically elevate him to a position in which he is due unearned deference and respect?

A lot of our British heritage makes me proud. A lot makes me feel quite sad. I feel no need to brag about the good or apologise for the bad, because our heritage is history.

I'm not a republican at all. I have huge respect for HM the Queen and believe that for over 60 years she has more than met her obligations in increasingly difficult circumstances. But if the majority of the British population decided that the UK should become a republic, I'd shed no tears. I have no more interest in the opinion of, let's say Prince Charles, on Life, the Universe and Everything, than I do in that of Bono, or Sting, or Arnold Bleedin' Schwartzenegger. (All of whom, I'm sure, have led blameless lives and done myriad good things for humanity)

It's what you do that counts, not who your great grandparents were.

And that's quite a rant from someone who's done precious little.

jhopgood wrote:A friend of mine has always said that he could well inherit a Royal Title and that if they didn't change the rules, he and his Malaysian wife could sit in the House of Lords.

It made me wonder what others would do?

He might have a long wait to sit in the House of Lords: there are only 15 hereditary peers in the Lords, who were elected amongst themselves when the Lords was reformed a few years ago. Yes - when one dies, there's another election to fill the vacancy (self-nomination is de rigeur) but, so far, these have been filled by the hereditary peers unsuccessful the first time, i.e. they had already sat, so to speak. And his lovely wife will have an even longer wait - she would have the title of "Lady" but no right to sit in the Lords, except in the gallery!

Having said that, what fun to find out. I regularly rent a cottage in France from a French couple. I'd always called them Monsieur and Madame, but one day a couple of years ago they invited me in for a tour of their house. There were many photos of them and their family in front of a chateau. When I enquired, I was told they were in reality Comte and Comtesse but rarely used the titles. Vive la revolution!

My friend first mentioned this in the 1980's, well before the reforms, I think. According to Wikipedia the title became extinct in 1979 so it was after that date. I have only just been able to have a chat to his father on the matter.

Personally I don't care about titles or honours as I believe you should be judged on what you do, not what you inherited, and also should not do things in order to be recognised by others.

Two of my managers in Latin America got OBE's (also known as Other B*****s Efforts) and suggested that I should get more involved with the Embassy and things with a view to also getting a gong. My reply was that I was only too happy to help in whatever needed doing, but refused to do it with a view to getting a gong.
My father got a BEM and was quite upset at my attitude, but I just don't see the point.
I ended up founding the Buenos Aires Hash House Harriers, which was still running 12 years later, and that was good enough for me.

jhopgood wrote:I ended up founding the Buenos Aires Hash House Harriers, which was still running 12 years later, and that was good enough for me.

That must have confused the Argies - on, on, on!

Jenny Pardington wrote: I was told they were in reality Comte and Comtesse but rarely used the titles. Vive la revolution!

After the revolution a number of people took titles for whatever reason. My boss in London, a Frenchman of great charm and education, used a perfectly ordinary name and it must have been 10 years before I discovered that he is a Vicompte (?sp) and longer to find out that his ancestors escaped Mme Guillotine so the title is "genuine". Much later, after I retired I discovered that there is European royalty in the bloodline but never did he divulge any of this info directly.

He is now chairman of a quoted company but still uses only his "working name"

I think I'd probably want to delve around a bit just for interest but I don't think I'd want to try and ingratiate myself with the county set or anything like that. Family history is very interesting though. One side of ours has terrible mental illness (explains a lot really!) and on the other we can trace, through a very naughty man who took advantage of cousin Charlotte in the early 19th century, our line to Bess of Hardwick and also the Percys of Northumberland and the Plantaganets.

I thought there were 92 peers left in the Lords...

Anyway, I'd love to discover I was 11th Earl of Billingshurst or something...

Great Plum wrote:I thought there were 92 peers left in the Lords...

Whoops - my mistake (wake up at the back!): there are 90 hereditaries left in total (out of 735) of which 75 are/were elected by their peers.