KINLOSS, The Master of (the Hon Bevil David Stewart Chandos FREEMAN-GRENVILLE 1953-2012)

584 views
Skip to first unread message

Richard R

unread,
Feb 6, 2012, 6:12:34 AM2/6/12
to Peerage News
From the Times of 6 February 2012:

KINLOSS The Hon Bevile Freeman-Grenville of Sheriff Hutton, North
Yorkshire. Died on 31st January 2012 very suddenly. Beloved husband of
Marie and beloved son of Lady Kinloss and the late Dr G Freeman-
Grenville, a dearly loved brother and uncle. All enquiries to E & A
Agar 01653 693 816.

He was the only son and ha of Lady Kinloss (b 1922) and Greville
Stewart Parker FREEMAN (later FREEMAN-GRENVILLE) (d 2005). He m 2001
Marie-Thérèse (formerly Mrs Stuart Bunting-Sturrock) d of William
DRISCOLL of Otley, Yorks. No issue.

The late Master's older sister is the new heir to this Scottish
lordship:

The Hon TERESA MARY NUGENT Freeman-Grenville (b 1957). Unm.

The next heir is her sister: the Hon Hester Josephine Anne (b 1960) m
1984, Peter HAWORTH of Newstead Grange, Easingwold, York. They have 3
sons: Joseph Anthony HAWORTH (b 1985), David Arnold HAWORTH (b 1987)
and Christopher John HAWORTH (b 1989).


marquess

unread,
Feb 6, 2012, 7:23:07 AM2/6/12
to Peerage News
I wonder if the new hp will assume the mantle of Mistress of Kinloss?

Richard R

unread,
Feb 6, 2012, 8:57:31 AM2/6/12
to Peerage News
Yes, it'll be interesting to see what happens. Of course, we all know
why traditionally that didn't happen. But I think, in more modern
times, people don't associate such a title in a pejorative way.
Evidence the Mistress of Mar.
> > and Christopher John HAWORTH (b 1989).- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Pat

unread,
Feb 6, 2012, 8:34:14 PM2/6/12
to Peerage News
I`ve noticed in the past that some peerages that can pass through the
female line and have no male hp any sisters who are next in line are
described as co-heiresses. Does this apply only to titles that are in
abeyance? I seem to recall that this was the case with the barony of
Howard de Walden where all 4 sisters were described as co-heiresses
until the abeyance was terminated in favour of the eldest.
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

William

unread,
Feb 6, 2012, 10:29:28 PM2/6/12
to Peerage News
Ditto Baroness Wharton who had two daughters, Ziki & Caroline. They
both took as co-parceners, therefore neither took until the younger
daughter (who had one daughter only) renounced in favour of the older
(who had three sons and a daughter).

marquess

unread,
Feb 7, 2012, 8:50:36 AM2/7/12
to Peerage News
The term is usually applied to female heirs of baronies by writ of
summons, though I can think of two exceptions--the earldom of
Cromartie (a Victorian re-creation of an ancient Scottish title, with
remainders so convoluted ((when a simple remainder to the heirs
general would have sufficed)) that it has fallen into 'abeyance' and
the English earldom of Arlington (which should be have been called out
in favour along with the barony)

Richard R

unread,
Feb 7, 2012, 9:10:46 AM2/7/12
to Peerage News
We should perhaps make clear that Cromartie is not currently in
abeyance. It reached that state on the death of the grantee but was
soon terminated in favour of the eldest daughter. The current earl has
two unmarrried sons in their twenties, and a few other male heirs in
line, so it's unlikely to become abeyant again soon. But it is
unfortunate that the grant did not specify a more straightforward
remainder. The title featured in an article on peerage grants to women
in the 2008 edition of Debrett:

"The wife of the 3rd Duke of Sutherland, in the year her husband
succeeded to his title in 1861, obtained a grant of the earldom of
Cromartie [sic] with remainder to her younger children and to which
were attached the Cromarty estates. The grant was not as carefully
worded as that of Lucas of Crudwell however and fell into abeyance
between the daughters of the 2nd Earl. This was soon terminated in
favour of the elder daughter and the title has descended to the
present (5th) earl in the male line. He has a son and heir apparent,
but should a future earl produce only daughters, it would result in
another abeyance which may not be so speedily terminated."

Richard R

unread,
Feb 7, 2012, 9:13:48 AM2/7/12
to Peerage News
Sorry, now reading the Debrett text I see it wasn't the death of the
grantee, but the 2nd earl. The patent was clearly not well thought
out, evidence the mis-spelling of 'Cromarty' in the title, when it
should have been the same as the estate.

Richard R

unread,
Jul 19, 2014, 1:37:03 PM7/19/14
to peerag...@googlegroups.com
I hear through friends that the hp to KINLOSS does indeed use the style 'Mistress of Kinloss'.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages