Maltagenealogy.com presents
Looking for More Data Here.
Footnote: The title of “Conte” conferred
to the Maltese Citizen Giuseppe Preziosi
by Victor-Amadeus, King of Sicily, Duke of Savoy &c, and Perpetual Vicar of
the Empire, by a patent given at Rivoli
on the 19th October 1718. The title did not originate in Malta but in Rivoli which formed part of Savoy
(not Sicily). At Maltese Law it is only a foreign title and, as such, it can be
considered for the purposes of precedence if registration or magistral
recognition has been achieved in accordance with the rules of 1739 and 1795 as
enacted by Grand Masters Despuig
and Rohan.
In this case, the grant relative to “Conte
Preziosi” appears to
have been duly registered in the Cancelleria
of the Order.
VALUE OF REGISTRATION/MAGISTRAL RECOGNITION
From the records of the Cancelleria
it appeared that the titles so granted were registered in virtue of a rescript
from the Grand Master, on an application by the party concerned. The Royal
Commissioners of 1878 remarked that they were prone to believe that the Grand
Master would not have given his assent to registration without any
investigation. From the start, however, the Commissioners pointed out that the Despuig/Rohan Rules on the matter
did not deny nobility to a Titolato
who failed to duly register his title, but only assigned him no place insofar
as precedence was concerned. See:-
“Correspondence and Report of the
Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese
Nobility”, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of
Her Majesty (C.-2033.) (See Report Paras.
101-102). It is also noteworthy that the Commissioners did not consider all the
titles which were registered in the Cancelleria:
For example the title of Conte granted to Baldassare Fenech Bonnici on the 11 June 1798 by Pope Benedict XIV, which was
duly registered under Archives of the Order of Malta (554, f. 176) as well as
the Archives of the Inquisition of Malta (102m f. 32) was not considered by the
Report. It appears that no descendant of this grantee made any claim to the
Commissioners.
In regard to the title of “Conte”
granted to Preziosi, an
issue arose regarding the wide remainder of this title. In fact, at the
time of the Commission this title was claimed by five individuals namely Amadeo Preziosi, Dr. Antonio Preziosi, Dr. Camillo
Preziosi, Alessandro Preziosi and Dr. Vincenzo Camilleri.
The Commissioners allowed Amadeo’s
claim on the basis that he was the first born descendant, but refrained from
pronouncing themselves on the other claims. However the Secretary of State
wrote back asking for a decision and the Commissioners complied by saying
that the title must be deemed Sicilian and therefore descendible to the
firstborn son only, according to the order of succession prescribed by the ius feudale francorum.
(See:- “Correspondence and Report of the Commission
appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility”,
May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty
(C.-2033.) (See Report Paras. 173-175. Suppemental Report Part II).
The actual report says the following:
“This title was
conferred by Victor-Amadeus, King of Sicily, Duke of Savoy &c, and
Perpetual Vicar of the Empire, by a patent given at Rivoli on the 19th October 1718, in the fifth year
of his reign. It was granted to Giuseppe Preziosi
to hold to himself and his legitimate and natural male descendents in lawful
wedlock begotten whether born or to be born. The original patent of
creation was not produced before the Commission, it having probably been burnt
up during the government of the French Republic in these islands in pursuance
of an order by which, as already stated (#144), all the patents of nobility
were to be set on fire. It was, however, regularly registered in a record of
the Cancelleria, in
consequence of a rescript of the Grand Master,
bearing date the 20th June 1720, so that in the present case no recognition of
the title was necessary. Although in the patent registered in that record the
following expressions occur::-‘We
command that it should be registered in our Secretairerie of State’, no allusion is
therein made to the place in which it was enrolled agreeably to the King’s
commands.
Amadeo is the first-born son of the late
Conte Francesco, eldest son of the Conte Luigi Preziosi, and last holder of the title. The Conte
Luigi was born of Conte Gio
Francesco Preziosi, son of
the original grantee Conte Giuseppe.
Dr. Antonio, Dr. Camillo and Alessandro Preziosi are the younger sons of the said Conte
Luigi; but Dr Camilleri descends from the said Conte
Luigi through his mother Rosa Camilleri,
nee Preziosi. The
first-born son in the primogenial
line of the grantee is therefore Amadeo
Preziosi.
The Commissioners therefore concluded their
Report as follows:
“In order to determine the question
whether the title belongs to the first-born son of the family only, or is to be
taken to extend simultaneously to all the male descendents of Giuseppe Preziosi, first count, as it is
assumed by several gentlemen who claim it, we think that most of the remarks
made by us with reference to the preceding title of marquis, may be properly
applied to the present case. As we are not called upon to express any opinion
on this question, we shall simply mention the names of the gentlemen who
appeared to assert their claims to this title; these gentlemen are, Amadeo Preziosi, Dr. Antonio Dr. Camillo, and Alessandro Preziosi and Dr. Vincenzo Camilleri.”
If according to the terms of the grant, the
title is to be enjoyed jointly by all the contemporary male descendents of the
Conte Giuseppe Preziosi, the
number of such descendents, exclusive of the males descending from daughters
would be nine; but including the male descendents of daughters that number
would amount to 59.
This question
having been reserved to the British Secretary of State for the Colonies, the
Commissioners did not include the claimant’s name in the list. The
Secretary of State for the Colonies then wrote to Governor Straubanzee to ask the Commissioners to address this
issue.
In their
Supplemental Report, the Commissioners then decided as follows:
This title, originally granted to Giuseppe Preziosi and to his male
descendants, is claimed not only by Amadeo
Preziosi, the firstborn son
in the grantee’s primogenial
line, but also by four other gentlemen who contend that it may be enjoyed by
all the grantee’s contemporary male descendants, whether descending from
the male or the female lines.
We beg respectfully to refer to our remarks on
the claim to the title of Marchese conferred by the
said King Victor-Amadeus, in 1717, on Mario Testaferrata
(#166 et seq.). It will be seen that the grant by Victor-Amadeus to Mario Testaferrata, was made under the law respecting the titles
of the Sicilian nobility, and that it is consequently descendible to the
firstborn son only, according to the order of succession prescribed by the ius feudale francorum.
Applying those remarks to the present case, it
is obvious that the title of Conte granted to Giuseppe Preziosi cannot be enjoyed but by Amadeo Preziosi, whose name has been included in our list
of Titolati in our former
Report, and that the other gentlemen who have asserted a right to this title
have not succeeded in making out their claims.
In this way, the
title has been deemed descendible to the firstborn son only, according to the
order of succession prescribed by the ius
feudale francorum.