2nd Earl Jellicoe (1918-2007)/Heir Question
bx...@yahoo.com
the 2nd Earl Jellicoe on February 22nd. He was also one of the few
hereditary peers who was also created a life peer. (In 1999, he was
created Baron Jellicoe of Southampton.)
According to the article, he had 3 sons and 4 daughters from his 2
marriages and an additional son from a relationship. The latter son
does not appear in Debrett's or Burke's.
His succesor, Viscount Brocas, (Patrick John Bernard) was
born Aug. 29, 1950. He was married in 1971 to Geraldine Ann
FitzGerald Jackson and they divorced in 1981. The couple has a son,
Hon. Justin Amadeus , born in 1970 (prior to the marriage). Now,
according to Burke's, he is in remainder to the title. Is this
correct-- how can it be if he were born prior to the marriage? (The
situation is similar to the Earl of Harewood's heir, Viscount
Lascelles. In that case, it is the 2nd son-- the one born after the
parents' marriage who is the heir to the heir).
Viscount Brocas' other son ,Jack JELLICOE (b. 1977) was born out of
another relationship (according to Debrett's).
Am I therefore correct in assuming the heir to the new (3rd Earl) is
actually his younger brother, Hon. Nicholas Charles, born 1953? He is
married but with 2 daughters. The half-brother, Hon. John Philip,
born 1966 in shown as unmarried.
After that, there is no one in remainder to the Earldom and any other
male would be in remainder to the viscountcy only.
Brooke
bx...@yahoo.com
marquess
earldom is that the son born in 66 marries and has children. For a
similar case, see the earl of Lisburne, who's heir has a son born
before his marriage, and the heir is his brother. Unless we get some
landmark court ruling, which I doubt in will be the case in peerage
matters, as the succession is based upon those born in wedlock, then
the peerage is heading towards a viscountcy. Though I did read in one
of the news bullietins that the son b 66, was engaged or married?
bx...@yahoo.com
On Feb 24, 7:14�pm, "marquess" <marquessmarqu...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> That is an accurate accessment of the matter, the only hope for the
> earldom is that the son born in 66 marries and has children. For a
> similar case, see the earl of Lisburne, who's heir has a son born
> before his marriage, and the heir is his brother. Unless we get some
> landmark court ruling, which I doubt in will be the case in peerage
> matters, as the succession is based upon those born in wedlock, then
> the peerage is heading towards a viscountcy. Though I did read in one
> of the news bullietins that the son b 66, was engaged or married?
Same story for another earldom, Dartmouth. The 10th Earl, born 1949,
had a son in 2005 but has never been married. His brother, born
1951, is his heir. At least the brother has a son born IN wedlock!
What I also found interesting about the Jellicoes: according to the
article, the late 2nd Earl had a son from a relationship. Debrett's
lists the new earl with his aforementioned 2 sons, both born out of
wedlock. Debrett's also lists the older of these 2 sons as having a
daughter-- out of wedlock.
I guess we are likely to see more of out of wedlock births within the
peerage. It is a shame for us "peer watchers" as we are likely to see
the day (if we haven't already) where titles are likely to disappear
even though there are heirs but not "legitimate" ones.
Brooke
bx...@yahoo.com
> > b...@yahoo.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
marquess
one that was also had a Normanby title, the illegiititate line is
represented by a baronetcy! Even the Earldom of Kingston was threated
by such illegitimacy, but fortunately the current earl has done the
trick! St Leonards, is one that has fallen by the way side too due
three sons being born out of marriage. I think that the trick is that
once peers are married to the actual mother, they should be able to
take legal steps to legitimise their off spring. Just like in the
Scottish Peerage! Fortunately for Jellicoe, there is a viscountcy
under special remainder, and with Dartmouth, there are plenty of
heirs. Wardington is another sad case too, and with no option for
redemption! Yes illegitimacy and the encouragement of the like is the
biggest threat to the peerage in the long term!
On 25 Feb, 05:09, "b...@yahoo.com" <b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 24, 7:14?pm, "marquess" <marquessmarqu...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > That is an accurate accessment of the matter, the only hope for the
> > earldom is that the son born in 66 marries and has children. For a
> > similar case, see the earl of Lisburne, who's heir has a son born
> > before his marriage, and the heir is his brother. Unless we get some
> > landmark court ruling, which I doubt in will be the case in peerage
> > matters, as the succession is based upon those born in wedlock, then
> > the peerage is heading towards a viscountcy. Though I did read in one
> > of the news bullietins that the son b 66, was engaged or married?
>
> Same story for another earldom, Dartmouth. The 10th Earl, born 1949,
> had a son in 2005 but has never been married. His brother, born
> 1951, is his heir. At least the brother has a son born IN wedlock!
>
> What I also found interesting about the Jellicoes: according to the
> article, the late 2nd Earl had a son from a relationship. Debrett's
> lists the new earl with his aforementioned 2 sons, both born out of
> wedlock. Debrett's also lists the older of these 2 sons as having a
> daughter-- out of wedlock.
>
> I guess we are likely to see more of out of wedlock births within the
> peerage. It is a shame for us "peer watchers" as we are likely to see
> the day (if we haven't already) where titles are likely to disappear
> even though there are heirs but not "legitimate" ones.
>
> Brooke
>
>
>
> > On 24 Feb, 05:31, "b...@yahoo.com" <b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Today's Independent (Feb. 24th) is reporting the death at age 88 ?of
> > > the 2nd Earl Jellicoe on February 22nd. ?He was also one of the few
> > > hereditary peers who was also created a life peer. ?(In 1999, he was
> > > created Baron Jellicoe of Southampton.)
>
> > > According to the article, he had ?3 sons and 4 daughters from his 2
> > > marriages and an additional son from a relationship. ?The latter son
> > > does not appear in Debrett's or Burke's.
>
> > > His succesor, Viscount Brocas, ?(Patrick John Bernard) was
> > > born Aug. 29, 1950. ?He was married in 1971 to Geraldine Ann
> > > FitzGerald Jackson and they divorced in 1981. ?The couple has a son,
> > > Hon. Justin Amadeus , born in 1970 (prior to the marriage). ?Now,
> > > according to Burke's, he is in remainder to the title. ?Is this
> > > correct-- how can it be if he were born prior to the marriage? ?(The
> > > situation is similar to the Earl of Harewood's heir, Viscount
> > > Lascelles. ?In that case, it is the 2nd son-- the one born after the
> > > parents' marriage who is the heir to the heir).
>
> > > Viscount Brocas' other son ,Jack JELLICOE (b. 1977) was born out of
> > > another relationship (according to Debrett's).
>
> > > Am I therefore correct in assuming the heir to the new (3rd Earl) is
> > > actually his younger brother, Hon. Nicholas Charles, born 1953? ?He is
> > > married but with 2 daughters. ?The half-brother, Hon. John Philip,
bx...@yahoo.com
born within marriage as heirs was to ensure that the Peer would be the
father. Now with DNA testing, it really isn't necesary. However, we
shouldn't look for any changes anytime soon-- if ever.
Brooke
bx...@yahoo.com
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Michael Rhodes
Though I did read in one
> > of the news bullietins that the son b 66, was engaged or married?
The engagement was announced 5 Aug 2006, between the Hon. John Philip
Jellicoe (b. 1966), son of the 2nd Earl Jellicoe, KBE, DSO (b. 4 Apr
1918), of Tidcombe, Wiltshire, by his 2nd wife the former Philippa
Dunne (of that BLG family), & Katharine L. Napier, daughter of Maj.
Andrew Napier, of Syleham, Suffolk, and the late Mrs Napier.
Michael Rhodes
> Viscount Brocas' other son ,Jack JELLICOE (b. 1977) was born out of
> another relationship (according to Debrett's).
>
> Am I therefore correct in assuming the heir to the new (3rd Earl) is
> actually his younger brother, Hon. Nicholas Charles, born 1953? He is
> married but with 2 daughters. The half-brother, Hon. John Philip,
> born 1966 in shown as unmarried.
>
> After that, there is no one in remainder to the Earldom and any other
> male would be in remainder to the viscountcy only.
>
> Brooke
Cracroft says that Jack, b. 13 Mar 1977, is a son of Brocas's 1st
marriage, and born within the marriage.....
Michael Rhodes
On 28 Feb, 12:20, "Michael Rhodes" <migx73allenford2...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> > Viscount Brocas' other son ,Jack JELLICOE (b. 1977) was born out of
> > another relationship (according to Debrett's).
>
> > Brooke
> > b...@yahoo.com
>
> Jack Jellicoe is, I believe, a s on of the 2nd Earl and 1st wife but
> born after they divorced...
Sorry, I'm mixing my Jellicoes. The Jack b. Mar 1977 is the 2nd Earl's
grandson
marquess
the trick?
On 28 Feb, 00:31, "Michael Rhodes" <migx73allenford2...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote: