Stirling baronetcy of Glorat

[Henry W]

A sift through the forum didn't find anything on the 1666 creation in the Baronetage of Nova Scotia.

According to Leigh Rayment's site, this baronetcy became dormant on the death of the 9th Baronet in 1949.

http://www.leighrayment.com/baronetage/baronetsS4.htm

It lists a possible 10th Baronet in the footnote: Robert Wilson Stirling was aged 58 in 1949, resident in Indianapolis, according to the Los Angeles Times.

He is presumably now dead, and an obit search turned up: http://indianaobits.tributes.com/obituary/show/Robert-Stirling-34620969 - year of birth is about right and he is resident in the correct place. Is this our man?

Further searching turned up a new heir who may be prepared to take up the title in 2009: http://nltaylor.net/sketchbook/archives/364 and https://archive.fo/nuKtN

John C Stirling appears to be born 17 April 1948 - https://www.mylife.com/john-stirling/e795423967056, possibly has a wife named Wilma, and his sister died in 2010 - http://www.thegmcfamily.com/memsol.cgi?user_id=248368. John does not appear to be the son of Robert Wilson Stirling, but another John Stirling.

There are references to these probable heirs being listed in Debretts, so information from somebody with that access would be appreciated.

[G. Willis]

Henry, I haven't had a chance to look into this properly yet, but this source: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Amu1n0c_5o8C&pg=PA411&lpg=PA411&dq=Robert+W.+Stirling+undertaker+baronet&source=bl&ots=LQBHlnSbgk&sig=_MqY__5fEBvLR4FP50c-0WgNPWU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiqps3WwZTQAhXGBcAKHQI-Ac0Q6AEIKTAB#v=onepage&q=Robert%20W.%20Stirling%20undertaker%20baronet&f=false

seems to give some useful details of Robert Wilson Stirling's branch of the family, based upon which the John C. Stirling (1948-) you mention is shown to be R. W. Stirling's grandson through his son, John C. Stirling (1922-1982).

[G. Willis]

Also, this (rather twee) newspaper mention- viewable here: https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/105008859/ - corroborates the relationship as postulated above:

'Toddler John C. Stirling Jr., youngest of three Indianapolis heirs to the Scottish baronetcy vacated by the death of Sir George Stirling, the ninth Peer of Glorat, was happy yesterday over the attention paid him. While his grandfather, Robert Wilson Stirling, local mortician, held him, and his father, John C. Stirling, looked on, he took one look at the official paper showing the family history and laughed with glee'

[colinp]

Debretts does give some further information.  John Charles Stirling's address is listed as 240 Golf Court Greenwood Indiana USA 46143-1906 and is stated to be "the probable heir to the baronetcy".  His son Jeffrey Dundas Stirling (b 1969) (resident "Indianapolis Indiana USA") m 1995 Pamela Ann Melton and has issue Jake Andrew Stirling b 2001 and Luke Spencer Stirling b 2002.  His daughter April Cheryl Stirling b 1967 has issue living Mathew Dundas Schwartz b 2002

[G. Willis]

Excellent; thanks for the confirmation, Colin. Does Debrett's give John Charles Stirling's ancestry? (I generally only use Burke's!) The sources above seem to indicate accurately as far back as Robert Wilson Stirling, but one says R. W. Stirling was 'grandson of the 5th baronet', whilst 'Shelby County, Indiana History and Families, Vol. 1' led me to believe this wasn't in fact the case, indicating him to be son of Prof. Charles H. Stirling (1866-) and grandson of Robert D. Stirling (1832-1908).

[Baronetcy Lady]

John Charles is listed as the son of another John Charles, b 1922, d 1982, who married in 1944 to Evelyn Essig (d1995). (Debretts 2015.)

[G. Willis]

Thanks, Baronetcy Lady, that seems to confirm some of my findings and what Henry said; what I wonder is, do any of the published sources show that Robert Wilson Stirling was grandson of the 5th baronet, or is the omission of that fact the basis of what appears to be some sort of problem or hold-up with regard to this branch of the family establishing their claim to the baronetcy?

[Baronetcy Lady]

Debretts 2015 shows John Charles Stirling (1922-82) as the son of Robert Wilson Stirling, who was the son of late Charles Stirling, son of late Robert Dundas Stirling, 5th son of 5th baronet. 

There could be any number of reasons why no one has come forward to register their claim, chief of which being that they might not know. I plan to do some further investigation on this family and will report back.  

[Baronetcy Lady]

This is a funny one, right enough. Largely due to the 'romantic' story surrounding the 5th baronet's marriage(s) to Gloriana Folsom(e). He reputedly married her in Canada or Connecticut and then again in Glasgow, which might account for some of the births of their children apparently taking place before they were married. In the sources I've consulted I've found reported that they had anywhere between 14 and 19 children, the ones I have identified with some degree of certainty are: Mary b1771; Jean M b1773; Elizabeth b1774; Alexander Home b1775  and died at sea 1799; Barbara Black b1777; John Home b1778 and d1789; Ann b1780; Margaret b1780 [sic]; James b1781 and KIA 1798; Samuel b1783 (6bt); George b1786 (father of 7th and 8th bt); Thomas Dundas b1788 and d1825 (had a son John b1821 who reputedly died on his way to the West Indies); John b1790 and died unmarried 1833; William Bromley Cadogan b1791 and d1821; Robert b1792  (emigrated to USA and ancestor of presumed heir); Joseph b1794 died unmarried 1848; and Sarah b1794 [sic].

So out of ten possible sons, the only one who seems to have had viable male issue (after the death of the 9th Bt) is Robert Dundas, who seems to be the 9th son, rather than the 5th or 8th (I have found him reported as both in various sources).

Robert Dundas Stirling (b1792 in Scotland, emigrated to USA) married Mary Anne Pine 2 November 1820 in Maine; he died 9 December 1860 in Ohio and she died in Ottawa in 1832. They had two sons (and at least two daughters): William Bromley Cadogan b1823 (married and had two daughters and a son Robert); and Robert Dundas b1832 and d1906. 

Robert Dundas junior married Martha Elizabeth Thatcher in Indiana in 1858 (she died 1897). They had several daughters and a son, Charles Hopkins, who was born 1866 and died 1925. 

Charles Hopkins married Margaret Wilson in 1888 (she died 1944) and had a son Robert Wilson and a daughter, Amy D.

Robert Wilson was born 1890 and died 16 July 1970; he was the undertaker Hankinson (Debrett's) identified as the possible heir. Robert married Hazel Heiderich 27 March 1920 in Indiana and had a son John Charles, born 10 May 1922; he died 29 December 1987. This John married Evelyn Essig 28 June 1944 in Indiana and had a daughter Sheryl (who died 2010) and a son John Charles, who is currently presumed to be the heir.

I think the reason for the hesitation might be the son William Bromley Cadogan (b1823) had, who was also named Robert (underlined above). Nothing seems to be known of him and, if he exists, his male descendants (if any) would be ahead of John Charles. 

This one has piqued my interest and I'll do some more digging, see what I can find and if I can firm up some of the more tentative information.

[G. Willis]

A lot of useful detail there; thanks again, Baronetcy Lady. I think, at least pending any further details you might come to uncover, that you're right in suggesting that this mysterious Robert, son of W. B. C. Stirling, appears to be the likely fly in the ointment for the apparent heir. Certainly the mystery seems to be clearing up somewhat!

[Henry W]

Thanks for all the "Stirling" work.

I agree with BaronetcyLady's work on the lineage from Sir John, 5th Baronet to Robert Wilson and the line of presumed baronets, but had failed to find the William B C Stirling branch which may still be extant. I am relatively sure from the press-related articles that John C Stirling Jnr is aware that he is in line, especially as the family has been aware of their descent since the late 40s and a reference to the baronetcy was submitted to a book about local families. Presumably he has come up against the same stumbling block discovered above (and this block probably was troubling Debrett's in 1949) as there is a half reference to him trying to prove it in the 2009 article (even though frustratingly we cannot see it all - I would actually bother with the expense at the IndyStar archive if it had the article!!).

Also pleased to see that the future of the Baronetcy is secure for some time with two young males in direct line under the presumed heir. If the William BC Stirling line is in fact extinct, they are probably the only young male heirs who can carry it on.

[G. Willis]

Just checking in on this before tomorrow, and on a whim I had a look for something and have one quick addendum: I've located what I believe to be the right William B. C. Stirling, born 1822-3 in Canada, in the 1870 U.S. Census, resident Ohio; here his wife is Nancy C., his two daughters, Florence G. and Louisa D. are five and three years old, respectively, and a son, William (rather than Robert; I don't know whether this is necessarily accurate [certainly given the abundant errors I've encountered in U.K. census records over the years], or if his parents changed his name subsequently, or even if this 'William' is a younger son and Robert perhaps already left the household?) was born earlier that year.

There's also a marriage record, dated 31 March 1859, at Clermont, Ohio, for William B. C. Stirling and Nancy C. Banister. Somewhat confusing matters is the birth record for a 'Willie Stirling', 17 Nov. 1869 (therefore presumably the 'William' as above), with the mother's name given as 'Nancy C. Pumpelly', presumably indicating a previous marriage for her.

The 1880 census has 'W. B. C. Stirling', a carriage builder, of Batavia, Clermont, Ohio, father's birthplace Scotland, mother's birthplace Maine, U,S.A., with daughters Florence and Dean (sic; presumably the middle name of Louisa?) and son William.

These details might make William Stirling easier to trace, and any offspring.

Forgive the disjointed nature of this post, but I thought it worthwhile to add some notes whilst the details were to hand, that I (or, of course, anyone else, should they wish) can follow up on tomorrow.

[G. Willis]

Details of W. B. C. Stirling's business and quite a lot of family details here:

http://www.ohiogenealogyexpress.com/clermont/clermontco_bios_1913/clermontco_bios_1913_m.html

http://www.ohiogenealogyexpress.com/clermont/clermontco_bios_1913/clermontco_bios_1913_n.html

[Baronetcy Lady]

Yes, that's the right man. I've spent some time chasing this branch through US census and vital records and found that WBC and Nancy Stirling apparently had two sons: Robert bca1872 (according to printed sources - not found elsewhere) who presumably died young as he was not with them and not found anywhere in 1880 (or later); and William (sometimes William A) born 1869. William was a soldier in the Spanish War before retuning back to Ohio to live with his widowed father. He never married and died 2 July 1924. Note, Robert has been found ONLY in printed sources and I wonder if he's a 'ghost' in that the author knew WBC and Nancy had a son and entered William jnr as Robert thinking the boy had been named (as in the Scottish way) after WBC's father?

So it appears that this branch is now defunct and we are back to Robert's descendants, which means that barring someone coming out of the woodwork (unlikely) John Charles Stirling, born 1948 and of Indiana, is the prospective baronet.

[G. Willis]

Ah, very interesting! Could it be the dubious existence of Robert b. 1872 that constitutes the spanner in the works for J. C. Stirling's branch of the family, I wonder? Although, as you said, Baronetcy Lady, the evidence seems to be that he's the result of an error given that he appears only in printed sources. It certainly looks like you've unravelled the whole conundrum!