Irish peers

[Eleanor Doughty]

Hello all,

I've found myself going round in circles on a particular point and wondered if anyone happened to know the answer before I become totally dizzy.

For reasons that I will hopefully soon be able to impart, I am trying to determine how many of the current hereditary peers are peers by virtue of an Irish title alone – ie they don't have an English or Scottish or UK title at all, only an Irish one. I reckon it's 56 but I've lost track slightly. Does anyone have any advance (or decrease) on 56 please?!

Yours,

Eleanor 

[colinp]

I have the following (? where title is dormant because a claimant is not recognised):-

Earls (17 without doubtfuls)

Annesley, Antrim, Belmore, Caledon, Castle Stewart, Cavan (?), Darnley,  Kilmorey, Kingston, Lisburne, Mayo, Mexborough, Norbury, Ormonde and Ossory (?), Portarlington, Roden, Rosse, Westmeath, Winterton

Viscounts (15)

Ashbrook, Bangor, Charlemont, Chetwynd, De Vesci, Dillon, Doneraile, Galway, Gort, Harbeton, Hawarden, Lifford, Molesworth, Southwell, Valentia

Barons (33 without doubtfuls)

Ashtown, Aylmer, Bellew, Carbery, Castlemaine, Clanmorris, Crofton, Decies, Dufferin and Clandeboye (?), Dunalley, Dunboyne, Dunsany, Farnham, Fermoy, ffrench, Garvagh, Graves, Hotham, Huntingfield, Inchiquin, Kilmaine, Kingsale, Langford, Lisle, Louth, Macdonald, Massy, Muskerry, Newborough, Rathdonnell, Rendlesham, Talbot of Malahide, Trimlestown (dormant), Ventry, Waterpark

55 in total without doubtfuls

[dpth...@gmail.com]

or 65, if you add differently  :)

[Eleanor Doughty]

Thanks Colin! I am reassured by your figure. But the new entry of 65 is exactly why I've been going round in circles! 

[colinp]

I can't believe that for the all important total I put 55 instead of 65 and then didn't spot it! It's an age thing!  

[Eleanor Doughty]

Haha – and I didn't check it either, to be fair! Thanks Colin.

If anyone has any other advance on 65 I'd welcome it, though this seems very sensible to me

[marquess]

Darnley doesn't count as he hold an English barony by writ.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

After one of those mass creations of Irish peers (on this occasion five new barons, nine promoted to viscountcies and two promoted to earldoms), Horace Walpole wrote on 2 January 1781: "... what a brave string of Irish peers! they put me in mind of the chain of galley-slaves in Don Quixote. Like them, I dare swear, their new Lordships would one and all assure one, they are honest men!"

Several days later he recounted something on the same subject, said by Princess Emily: "She was talking of the crew of Irish peers, and said to the Duchess of Bedford, 'I would not give a straw to be a peer in this country -- no, give me a good brewhouse; that is what makes one considerable here...'"

[S. S.]

I am going to assume Walpole was talking about the spate of creations between 4 Jan 1781 through 13 Jan 1781, viz.

1.     Earl Conyngham for the Viscount Conyngham (4 Jan)

2.     Viscount Lifford for the Baron Lifford (4 Jan)

3.     Baron Tracton for James Dennis (4 Jan)

4.     Earl of Mountcashell for the Viscount Mountcashell (5 Jan)

5.     Viscount Desart for the Baron Desart (5 Jan)

6.     Baron Muskerry for Sir Robert Deane, Bt (5 Jan)

7.     Viscount Erne for the Baron Erne (6 Jan)

8.     Baron Belmore for Armar Corry (6 Jan)

9.     Viscount Farnham for the Baron Farnham (8 Jan)

10.  Baron Welles for Thomas Knox (8 Jan)

11.  Viscount Carhampton for the Baron Irnham (9 Jan)

12.  Baron Sheffield for John Baker Holroyd (9 Jan)

13.  Viscount Bangor for the Baron Bangor (10 Jan)

14.  Viscount Melbourne for the Baron Melbourne (11 Jan)

15.  Viscount Clifden for the Baron Clifden (12 Jan)

16.  Viscount Mayo for the Baron Naas (13 Jan)

16 peerages created in total.

5 baronies; 9 viscountcies; 2 earldoms.

Of these, only 5 were actual new creations (all barons). 9 were promotions to viscountcies from baronies and 2 were promotions to earldoms from viscountcies.

S.S.

[S. S.]

One thing I just thought of, did Walpole know of these creations beforehand or were they announced in the Gazette of the time?

S.S.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Apparently the full list was announced in the London Gazette No. 12146, 19-23 December 1780.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

I don't know of a place online which has the London Gazette, but here is a link to an article on "Gazette Promotions", dated 23 December 1780, in the January 1781 Gentleman's Magazine. While the GM article wouldn't have been available until the end of January, it was apparently copying the more official announcement made in December. All the new creations and promotions are mentioned.

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015013465912&seq=57

paged 47-48.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Walpole's reactions, or references to, other mass creations of Irish peers:

On another mass creation, of nine Irish baronies, announced in the London Gazette No. 12476, 17-20 September 1783, HW wrote: "... I could not help smiling at the King's showering Irish peerages. Is not it a little like the Old Pretender comforting himself for the loss of a crown by bestowing pinchbeck coronets? I wish some of the engineers of the American war were to be created Dukes of New England and Earls of Boston and Charlestown; and that since they have been so unlike the Romans who acquired the titles of Africani for conquering hostile countries, our Machiavels were to be denominated from the provinces that they have lost."


And in 1786, after the 1785 creations, when sixteen new Irish peers were made or promoted, or given special remainders, and one was restored, HW wrote: "I hope our daily oracles lie... about the Whiteboys; at least I flatter myself that our Lord's [Ossory's] domains are unmolested by them. I am surprised that they are not quieted and all made peers!"

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Other interesting Walpoliana about Irish peers:


1. In 1761 there was some issue about whether Irish peers were entitled to walk in the royal marriage procession. HW wrote to Lord Strafford, 8 September 1761: "Lord Halifax has stuck up a paper in the coffee-room at Arthur's, importing, 'that his Majesty, not having leisure to determine a point of such great consequence, permits for this time such Irish peers as shall be at the marriage to walk in the procession.' Everybody concludes those personages will understand this order, as it is drawn up in their own language; otherwise it is not very clear how they are to walk to the marriage, if they are at it before they come to it."


2. About the 1783 creations, HW wrote to Sir Horace Mann, 27 September 1783: "Would you give a straw to have me copy the Gazette, which you see as well as I, only to tell you that there are nine new Irish Lords and Ladies of whom I never saw the persons of three?"


3. HW to Mann, 29 November 1756: “In the mean time the King, of his own motion, has given a red riband and an Irish barony to old Blakeney, who has been at court in a hackney-coach, with a foot soldier behind it. As he has not only lost his government, but as he was bedrid while it was losing, these honours are a little ridiculed: we have too many governors that will expect titles, if losses are pretensions! Mr Obrien is made Earl of Thomond: my Lady Townshend rejoices; she says he has family enough to re-establish the dignity of the Irish peerage, to which of late nothing but brewers and poulterers have been raised; that she expected every day to receive a bill from her fishmonger, signed, Lord Mount-Shrimp!"


4. HW to Mann, 16 July 1776: "... I could insert a list of so many new Irish Lords, that there would be no room to sign my name. But what would you care for a bead-roll of mushrooms, half of whom, like your procession-nobility at Florence, will not be gentlemen under a generation or two? They are like old Lord Bateman, whom George I made an Irish peer, to avoid making him a Knight of the Bath, for said he, 'I can make him a lord, but I cannot make him a gentleman.' Nay, all these earls and barons may be well born for aught I know, but their very number makes them a mob; they are thirty."

[S. S.]

Paul, you can access any past issue of the London, Edinburgh or Belfast Gazette through the Gazette website (https://www.thegazette.co.uk/).

I attach a copy of each of the London Gazette notices mentioned here (you can download the PDFs).

Note all the dates of creations and particulars I have given before and will be given are from J. C. Sainty’s Peerage Creations.

 

 

Walpole’s letter to Mann of 29 Nov 1756 mentioning Blakeney and Thomond are the following creations. They are mentioned in London Gazette No 9639 covering 27-30 Nov 1756 and London Gazette No 9642 covering 7-11 Dec 1756 respectively:

Earl of Thomond for Percy Wyndham O’Brien (11 Dec 1756) and Baron Blakeley for Lt-Gen Sir William Blakeney KB (18 Dec 1756).

 

Walpole’s letter to Mann of 16 July 1776 mentioning the large number of new Irish creations refers to the following. They are mentioned in London Gazette No 11679 covering 29 June through 2 July 1776:

1.       Earl of Lisburne for the Viscount Lisburne (18 July)

2.       Viscount Southwell for the Baron Southwell (18 July)

3.       Baron de Montalt for Sir Thomas Maude, Bt (18 July)

4.       Earl Ligonier for the Viscount Ligonier (19 July)

5.       Viscount de Vesci for the Baron Knapton (19 July)

6.       Baron Macartney for Sir George Macartney (19 July)

7.       Earl of Clanwilliam for the Viscount Clanwilliam (20 July)

8.       Viscount Enniskillen for the Baron Mountflorence (20 July)

9.       Baron Gosford for Sir Archibald Acheson, Bt (20 July)

10.   Earl Nugent for the Viscount Clare with special remainder (21 July)

11.   Viscount Orwell for the Baron Orwell (21 July)

12.   Baron Clonmore for Ralph Howard (21 July)

13.   Earl of Glandore for the Viscount Crosbie (22 July)

14.   Viscount Aldborough for the Baron Baltinglass (22 July)

15.   Baron Milford for Sir Richard Philipps, Bt (22 July)

16.   Viscount Clermont for the Baron Clermont with special remainder (23 July)

17.   Baron Newborough for Sir Thomas Wynn, Bt (23 July)

18.   Viscount Carlow for the Baron Dawson (24 July)

19.   Baron Lucan for Sir Charles Bingham, Bt (24 July)

20.   Baron Macdonald for Sir Alexander Macdonald, Bt (25 July)

21.   Baron Newhaven for Sir William Mayne, Bt (26 July)

22.   Baron Clifden for James Agar (27 July)

23.   Baron Kensington for William Edwardes (28 July)

24.   Baron Westcote for William Henry Lyttelton (29 July)

25.   Baron Ongley for Robert Henley Ongley (30 July)

26.   Baron Shuldham for Molyneux Shuldham (31 July)

27.   Baron Nass for John Bourke (1 Aug)

28.   Baron Doneraile for St Leger St Leger (2 Aug0

29.   Baron Templetown for Clotworthy Upton (3 Aug)

30.   Baron Massy for Hugh Massy (4 Aug)

Note that Lord Bateman’s creation was as Viscount Bateman and Baron Culmore on 12 July 1725.

 

London Gazette No. 1214 covering 19-23 December 1780 will give you the following peerages:

1.       Earl Conyngham for the Viscount Conyngham (4 Jan)

2.       Viscount Lifford for the Baron Lifford (4 Jan)

3.       Baron Tracton for James Dennis (4 Jan)

4.       Earl of Mountcashell for the Viscount Mountcashell (5 Jan)

5.       Viscount Desart for the Baron Desart (5 Jan)

6.       Baron Muskerry for Sir Robert Deane, Bt (5 Jan)

7.       Viscount Erne for the Baron Erne (6 Jan)

8.       Baron Belmore for Armar Corry (6 Jan)

9.       Viscount Farnham for the Baron Farnham (8 Jan)

10.   Baron Welles for Thomas Knox (8 Jan)

11.   Viscount Carhampton for the Baron Irnham (9 Jan)

12.   Baron Sheffield for John Baker Holroyd (9 Jan)

13.   Viscount Bangor for the Baron Bangor (10 Jan)

14.   Viscount Melbourne for the Baron Melbourne (11 Jan)

15.   Viscount Clifden for the Baron Clifden (12 Jan)

16.   Viscount Mayo for the Baron Naas (13 Jan)

 

London Gazette No. 12476 covering 17-20 September 1783 will give you the following peerages (note this one is immediately following the ones of 1781 with only the Barony of Hood created on 12 Sept 1782):

1.       Baron Sheffield for the Baron Sheffield with a special remainder (20 Sept)

2.       Baron Harberton for Arthur Pomeroy (10 Oct)

3.       Baron Leitrim for Robert Clements (11 Oct)

4.       Baron Landaff for Francis Mathew (12 Oct)

5.       Baron Riversdale for William Tonson (13 Oct)

6.       Baroness Donoughmore for Christiana Hely-Hutchinson (16 Oct)

7.       Baron Delaval for Sir John Hussy Delaval, Bt (17 Oct)

8.       Baron Muncaster for John Pennington with special remainder (21 Oct)

9.       Baron Penrhyn for Richard Pennant (19 Nov)

 

London Gazette No 12661 covering 2-5 July 1785 will give you the following peerages for 19 June through 30 Dec 1785:

1.       Earl of Antrim for the Earl of Antrim with special remainder (19 June)

2.       Viscount Cremorne for the Baron Dartrey (19 June)

3.       Countess of Longford for Elizabeth, Dowager Baroness Longford (20 June)

4.       Viscount Gosford for the Baron Gosford (20 June)

5.       Earl of Portarlington for the Viscount Carlow (21 June)

6.       Viscount Wicklow for the Baron Clonmore (21 June)

7.       Earl of Farnham for the Viscount Farnham (22 June)

8.       Viscount Doneraile for the Baron Doneraile (22 June)

9.       Earl of Carhampton for the Viscount Carhampton (23 June)

10.   Earl of Mayo for the Viscount Mayo (24 June)

11.   Baron Lismore for Cornelius O’Callaghan (27 June)

12.   Baron Loftus for Charles Tottenham Loftus (28 June)

13.   Baron de Montalt for Sir Cornwallis Maude Bt (29 June)

14.   Baron Sunderlin for Richard Malone (30 June)

Only one other peerage was created that year (i.e. 1785, not included in the notice as above), was Viscount Pery for Edmond Sexten Pery (30 Dec).

 

S.S.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Thanks, though the point of my yesterday's posts was to show what many contemporary English people felt about the spate of Irish peers, and not just to compile a dry list of names and dates. I never understand the attraction of just gathering names and dates without learning what these people actually did, said and felt. That's why I was keen to include the attitudes of Lady Townshend, Princess Emily and King George I, besides Walpole's.

[Robert Jewell]

That, Sir, is why I am at present tunneling through the Complete Baronetage: to flesh out some of the people, not just to put more into a database. I get off onto some of the most amazing rabbit-trails. Most interesting. Yesterday was a 4-year-old who was made a baronet to honor his father. Sir John Narborough, Bart. His family is associated with the wonderfully named Sir Cloudesly Shovell. But, sadly the young baronet died with his brother and heir in a shipwreck with Sir Cloudesly. Fascinating.

[Paul Theroff]

very nice.... thanks for the interesting story!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Peerage News" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/peerage-news/vlVSzveWU_c/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to peerage-news...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/peerage-news/a3e6f813-ae61-4f8a-b953-0f441718a3e8n%40googlegroups.com.

--

D. P. Theroff

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Just looking into the Narborough geneaolgy a bit further, I guess that Sir Cloudesley became Sir John's stepfather, and gave him a half-sister, Elizabeth Shovell, wife of the 1st Marsham Lord Romney and then of the 3rd Earl of Hyndford.