MOORE / Camp engagement

[Richard R]

From the Times of 31 Oct 2020: THE BARON G. A. MOORE OF MELLIFONT AND MISS C. C. CAMP The engagement is announced between Garrett, son of The Earl and Countess of Drogheda, and Colleen, daughter of Mr and Mrs Wilson Camp of San Francisco.


This is an extraordinary announcement if I'm reading it correctly, as it appears to assign the Earl's second subsidiary title, Baron MOORE OF MELLEFONT [sic] cr [I] 1616 to his yr son. He is not given the style in the latest edition of Debrett's and it would not, of course, receive official sanction. But I wonder if we'll see more of families departing from 'the rules'? It begs the question whether any children of 'The Baron' will be styled 'Hon' and whether a first son would 'succeed' to the 'title'? The Earl's ha, Viscount Moore, would be referred to as 'Lord Moore' and I note the announcement does not refer to the yr son as LORD Moore of Mellifont. Or is there some other explanation for this style, such as a feudal barony? Discuss!!

Hon Garrett Alexander MOORE (b 1986) yr s of 12th Earl of DROGHEDA (b 1937) and Alexandra Nicolette (b 1953) only child of Sir (John) Nicholas HENDERSON GCMG KCVO (1919-2009) and Mary Xenia Barber CAWADIAS OBE (d 2004).

[marquess]

I wonder if it was an American who posted the notice? The baron G.A. Moore sounds absurd, it almost makes him sound like a continental baron, a younger son of the principal holder. 

[S R Eglesfield]

The only Colleen Camp I can find on an internet search is Colleen Celeste Camp, an actress born to Dorothy and Wilson Camp in San Francisco in 1953 (her wikipedia biography is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colleen_Camp). If she is not the Miss C C Camp in the announcement, it seems an extraordinary coincidence of names and location. However, given the incorrect title ascribed to the Hon Garrett Moore in the announcement, and the disparity in age between him and the American actress, I wonder whether the announcement is some sort of spoof?

[Henry W]

I think marquess's suggestion is probably the most likely especially as the style is clearly wrong, but I will offer another possibility:

If the groom's elder brother, Viscount Moore, has died (escaping the notice of this group), then Garrett would be heir apparent. Whilst he should be known as Viscount Moore in that instance, he might opt not to use that courtesy title out of respect (this has happened in other families), and instead uses another title possessed by his father a courtesy.  However, they would both be known as Lord Moore in general conversation.

I think my suggestion is unlikely as I think we would have picked up on such a death, but I mention it anyway.

[colinp]

https://www.tatler.com/article/garrett-moore-son-of-earl-of-drogheda-engaged-to-colleen-camp 

[marquess]

The bride to be is 67 years old, did they get the age wrong somehow? I fear the earldom is in real danger of extinction.

On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 3:21:08 PM UTC+7, Richard R wrote: