The notorious 6th Earl of Anglesey?

105 views
Skip to first unread message

Shinjinee

unread,
Nov 17, 2012, 5:05:02 AM11/17/12
to peerag...@googlegroups.com

In following up on this very notorious man (the model for the uncle in RL Stevenson's Kidnapped!), I couldn't find the birth and death
dates for his son by Ann Salkeld (whom he supposedly married in 1742).

When did Richard Annesley die? He claimed the titles of Anglesey and Valentia in 1770 and 1772 but was disallowed in the Irish House of Lords which declared his half-brother Arthur Annesley to be the legitimate Viscount Valentia. (The English House of Lords disallowed his parents's 1741 marriage, but made no judgement on Richard's claim based on *his* parents 1742 marriage)

For the confused, there was am Irish peer named Richard Annesley, 6th (or 7th) Earl of Anglesey who died 1761. He was definitely married to one woman who died August 1741.  But before that, he married a lady Anne Simpson in 1727, had three daughters by her, inherited his brother's barony of Altham (more on that later), inherited the earldom of Anglesey in 1737  and drove his wife/mistress and their three daughters out.   When she appealed for support from ecclesiastical courts, he finally declared his marriage null and void on grounds that he already had a wife living in England. Shades of the present duke of Manchester (whose first marriage was revealed to be a second and bigamous marriage, rendering his unfortunate children illegitimate for purposes of the succession).

Not content, Lord Anglesey went on to marry a Juliana Talbot nee Donovan, whose background was a bit murkey (then vilified and called a menial servant among others, later shown by her supporters to be from a distinguished Irish fmaily) and had one son and three daughters by her.  The problem - the mariage was secret and took place one month after the death of his first wife. The secrecy being a problem, and the fact that neither admitted to it until 1752 and the bride kept using her previous name etc etc. 

In 1742 Lord Anglesey married another lady an Ann Salkeld in London,and had a son Richard by her. She died and he brought the infant back to Ireland and severed all contact with the maternal relations per his son.  In the meantime Juliana Donovan/Talbot/Annesley continued to gain ascendancy over the earl, who married her openly in 1752.  He made out his will in 1759 in her favor and that of their son and three daughters. He described all other children (including the ones by Anne Simpson and Ann Salkeld) as illegitimate.

When he died 1761, Juliana inherited his property.  Her son Arthur then sat in the Irish House of Lords and then claimed the earldom of Anglesey at which point his half-brother Richard woke up and claimed the title as the rightful son.

And from there, the second Annesley scandal and trial of the 18th century.  Result, Arthur was found legitimate in Ireland which held the 1741 marriage valid, and illegitimate in England which didnt. (Something to do with the fact that all the witnesses were dead, the principals pretended to remain unmarried for another 11 years, etc etc). 

But apparently nothing was stated about the legitimacy of the 1742 marriage in England to Ann Salkeld.  So was Richard Annesley the 7th (or 8th) Earl of Anglesey or not?  And did he die unmarried or sonless, given that the title was created as a marquessate for the earl of Uxbridge in 1815?  And when exactly did he die?

I would have found this a typical imbroglio pre Hardwicke Act where a man could marry multiple times, except for the more recent case of the Duke of Manchester and some other interesting stories of bigamy (for less well known folk).

Numbering of the earls
upto the 5th Earl of Anglesey there no problem.  However, the 4th Lord Altham's son disappeared young, supposedly murdered or kidnapped by - no other than the uncle Richard Annesley (later 6th Earl of Anglesy).  The "lost heir" James Annesleym kidnapped and sold into domestic indenture in the American colonies, returned to Ireland,  He was later recognized legitimate in Ireland, (but not necessarily recognized as legitimate in England).  But James never sought the titles nor was called by them.  He apparently died 1759 childless, so his wicked uncle inherited all claims.  Assuming that Richard remains the 6th Earl (as recognized in England anyway), what happened to the earldom when the younger Richard made his claim in 1770?  Still extinct, or dismissed??

Shinjinee
who is pondering strange historical cases of the Georgian era

Shinjinee

unread,
Nov 17, 2012, 5:27:43 AM11/17/12
to peerag...@googlegroups.com
Cokayne's account of the strange Anglesey case can be found at
http://archive.org/stream/completepeerageo01coka/completepeerageo01coka_djvu.txt

[extract quoted as printed]

"
we hear oi another illegit. s. of his (by yet another woman, named Salkeld), 
one Richard Annesley, who claimed the title in 1770. The London Evening Post, 
4 Apr. 1722, states this Richard to be the legit, s. of Earl Richard " by Anne, 2nd da. 
of William Salkeld, of the city of London, Merchant. " (The date of 1 742 is attri- 
buted to this marriage in a ped. of Jackson — the name of Anne Salkeld's mother — in 
Morehouse's History of Kirkburton, co. York, p. 172. See ISS . & Q., 7th Series, vol. ii, 
p. 16.) The possibility of such a marriage is doubtful, as the Earl's 1st marriage (or 
marriages) was (or were) in 17 15, soon after he was of age, and the subsequent marriage 
(the 1st of the two marriages with Juliana, who survived him) was within a month of 
the death of one of these wives, probably the 1st and lawful wife. See N. is" Q., and 
Series, vol. x, pp. 27 and 156, as also several notices in 2nd Series, vol. xi. "

....

The title of Anglesey, however, was (in accordance with the

English decision of 1771, whereby it was held to have been extinet in 1761)

made use of again, as a Peerage title, some thirty years before such extinct-

ion of issue had occurred.

[end of quote]

to answer my own question, the House of Lords (England) decided that the earldom was extinct.  I assume they decided that a) the marriage of 1742 was doubtful (if at all considered), and that b)  all sons born to the late earl were illegitimate by English law.   I still don't know when Richard Annesley died....

Shinjinee

Paul Theroff

unread,
Nov 17, 2012, 7:28:14 AM11/17/12
to peerag...@googlegroups.com
This won't answer all your questions, but my genealogical account of the family is at http://www.angelfire.com/realm/gotha/gotha/annesley.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Peerage News" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/peerage-news/-/yTIrH8hYE3QJ.
To post to this group, send email to peerag...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to peerage-news...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/peerage-news?hl=en.


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7702 (20121117) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages