Last updated 27/04/2020
Date Rank Order Name Born Died  Age
4 May 1605 B 1 Sir George Carew 29 May 1555 27 Mar 1629 73
Created Baron Carew 4 May 1605
He was subsequently created Earl of
Totness (qv) in 1626
13 Jun 1834 B[I] 1 Robert Shapland Carew 9 Mar 1787 4 Jun 1856 69
9 Jul 1838 B Created Baron Carew [I] 13 Jun 1834
and Baron Carew 9 Jul 1838
MP for Wexford 1812-1830 and 1831-1834. Lord 
Lieutenant Wexford  1831-1856  KP 1851
4 Jun 1856 2 Robert Shapland Carew 23 Jan 1818 8 Sep 1881 63
MP for Wexford 1840-1847. Lord Lieutenant
Wexford 1856-1881   KP 1872
8 Sep 1881 3 Robert Shapland George Julian Carew 15 Jun 1860 29 Apr 1923 62
29 Apr 1923 4 George Patrick John Carew 1 Feb 1863 21 Apr 1926 63
21 Apr 1926 5 Gerald Shapland Carew 26 Apr 1860 3 Oct 1927 67
3 Oct 1927 6 William Francis Conolly-Carew 23 Apr 1905 27 Jun 1994 89
27 Jun 1994 7 Patrick Thomas Conolly-Carew 6 Mar 1938
1 Nov 2002 B[L] 1 George Leonard Carey 13 Nov 1935
Created Baron Carey of Clifton for life
1 Nov 2002
Archbishop of Canterbury 1991-2002  PC 1991
6 Feb 1622 B 1 Sir Robert Carey 1560 12 Apr 1639 78
Created Baron Carey of Leppington
6 Feb 1622
He was subsequently created Earl of
Monmouth (qv) in 1626
23 Jun 1785 E[I] 1 Simon Luttrell 1713 14 Jan 1787 73
Created Baron Irnham 13 Oct 1768,
Viscount Carhampton 9 Jan 1781 and
and Earl of Carhampton 23 Jun 1785
MP for Mitchell 1755-1761,Wigan 1761-1768,
Weobly 1768-1774 and Stockbridge 1774-1780
14 Jan 1787 2 Henry Lawes Luttrell 7 Aug 1743 25 Apr 1821 77
MP for Bossiney 1768-1769 and 1774-1784,
Middlesex 1769-1774, Plympton Erle 1790-1794
and Ludgershall 1817-1821.  PC [I] 1786
25 Apr 1821 3 John Luttrell-Olmius 1741 19 Mar 1829 87
to     MP for Stockbridge 1774-1775 and 1780-1785
19 Mar 1829 Peerages extinct on his death
17 Nov 1999 B[L] 1 Peter Alexander Rupert Carington,6th Baron 6 Jun 1919 9 Jul 2018 99
to     Carrington
9 Jul 2018 Created Baron Carington of Upton for life
17 Nov 1999
Peerage extinct on his death
18 Jul 1917 M 1 Alexander Albert Mountbatten 23 Nov 1886 23 Feb 1960 73
to     Created Viscount Launceston,Earl of
23 Feb 1960 Berkhamsted and Marquess of 
Carisbrooke 18 Jul 1917
Peerage extinct on his death
20 Aug 1620 B[S] 1 Robert Maxwell after 1586 May 1646
Created Lord Maxwell,Eskdale and 
Carleill and Earl of Nithsdale 
20 Aug 1620
See "Nithsdale"
22 May 1626 B 1 Sir Dudley Carleton 10 Mar 1574 15 Feb 1632 57
Created Baron Carleton 22 May 1626
and Viscount Dorchester 25 Jul 1628
See "Dorchester"
19 Oct 1714 B 1 Henry Boyle 12 Jul 1669 31 Mar 1725 55
to     Created Baron Carleton 19 Oct 1714
14 Mar 1725 MP for Tamworth 1689-1690,Cambridge 
University 1692-1705 and Westminster 1705-
1710. Chancellor of the Exchequer 1701-1708
Secretary of State 1708-1710. Lord President
of the Council 1721-1725.  PC 1701  PC [I]
1704  Lord Lieutenant Yorkshire West Riding
Peerage extinct on his death
6 Aug 1786 B 1 Richard Boyle,2nd Earl of Shannon 30 Jan 1728 20 May 1807 79
Created Baron Carleton 6 Aug 1786
See "Shannon"
21 Nov 1797 V[I] 1 Hugh Carleton 11 Sep 1739 25 Feb 1826 86
to     Created Baron Carleton of Amner
25 Feb 1826 17 Sep 1789 and Viscount Carleton of
Clare 21 Nov 1797
Solicitor General [I] 1779. Lord Chief
Justice of the Common Pleas [I] 1787-1800
PC [I] 1787
Peerage extinct on his death
27 Jul 1999 B[L] 1 Alexander Charles Carlile 12 Feb 1948
Created Baron Carlile of Berriew for life
27 Jul 1999
MP for Montgomeryshire 1983-1997
26 Mar 1627 V[I] 1 Barnham Swift 17 Dec 1606 28 Jan 1634 27
to     Created Viscount Carlingford 
28 Jan 1634 26 Mar 1627
Peerage extinct on his death
For information on the Carlingford "Peerage" case
of 1905, see the note at the foot of this page
26 Jun 1661 E[I] 1 Theobald Taaffe,2nd Viscount Taaffe c 1603 31 Dec 1677
Created Earl of Carlingford 
26 Jun 1661
31 Dec 1677 2 Nicholas Taaffe 2 Jul 1689
2 Jul 1689 3 Francis Taaffe 1639 Aug 1704 65
Aug 1704 4 Theobald Taaffe 24 Nov 1738
to     Earldom extinct on his death
24 Nov 1738
1 May 1761 V[I] 1 George Carpenter,3rd Baron Carpenter 26 Aug 1723 9 Mar 1762 38
Created Viscount Carlingford and
Earl of Tyrconnel 1 May 1761
See "Tyrconnel"
28 Feb 1874 B 1 Chichester Samuel Parkinson-Fortescue 18 Jan 1823 30 Jan 1898 75
to     Created Baron Carlingford 28 Feb 1874
30 Jan 1898 He subsequently succeeded as 2nd Baron 
Clermont (qv) in 1887
MP for Louth 1847-1874. President of the
Board of Trade 1871-1874. Lord Privy Seal
1881-1885.  Lord President of the Council
1883-1885. Lord Lieutenant Essex 1873-1892
PC 1864  PC [I] 1866  KP 1882
Peerages extinct on his death
25 Mar 1322 E 1 Sir Andrew de Hartcla 3 Mar 1323
to     Summoned to Parliament as Lord 
3 Mar 1323 de Hartcla 15 May 1321 and further
created Earl of Carlisle 25 Mar 1322
He was executed and the peerage forfeited
13 Sep 1622 E 1 James Hay,1st Viscount Doncaster c 1580 25 Apr 1636
Created Earl of Carlisle 13 Sep 1622
KG 1624
25 Apr 1636 2 James Hay c 1612 30 Oct 1660
to     He subsequently succeeded as 2nd Lord Denny de
30 Oct 1660 Waltham in 1637. Peerages extinct on his death
20 Apr 1661 E 1 Charles Howard 1629 24 Feb 1685 55
Created Baron Dacre of Gillesland,
Viscount Howard of Morpeth and Earl
of Carlisle 20 Apr 1661
MP for Westmorland 1653 and Cumberland
1654-1660. Lord Lieutenant Westmorland
and Cumberland 1660-1685 and Durham 1672.
Governor of Jamaica 1677
24 Feb 1685 2 Edward Howard 1646 23 Apr 1692 45
MP for Morpeth 1666-1679, Cumberland
1679-1681 and Carlisle 1681-1685. Lord
Lieutenant Cumberland 1689-1692
23 Apr 1692 3 Charles Howard 1669 1 May 1738 68
MP for Morpeth 1689-1692. Lord
Lieutenant Cumberland and Westmorland
1694-1738. First Lord of the
Treasury 1701-1702 and 1715. PC 1701
1 May 1738 4 Henry Howard 14 Aug 1694 3 Sep 1758 64
MP for Morpeth 1715-1738. KG 1756
3 Sep 1758 5 Frederick Howard 28 May 1748  4 Sep 1825 77
President of the Board of Trade 1779.
Lord Lieutenant E Riding Yorkshire 1780-
1782 and 1799-1807. Lord Lieutenant of 
Ireland 1780-1782. Lord Privy Seal 1783. 
KT 1767 PC 1777 KG 1793
4 Feb 1825 6 George Howard 17 Sep 1773 7 Oct 1848 75
MP for Morpeth 1795-1806 and Cumberland
1806-1820. Lord Lieutenant E Riding 
Yorkshire 1824-1840. Lord Privy Seal 1827-
1828 and 1834. PC 1806  KG 1837
7 Oct 1848 7 George William Frederick Howard 18 Apr 1802 5 Dec 1864 62
MP for Morpeth 1826-1830, Yorkshire 1830-
1832 and Yorkshire West Riding 1832-1841
and 1846-1848. Chief Secretary for Ireland
1835-1841. Chief Commissioner of Woods 
and Forests 1846-1850. Chancellor of the
Duchy of Lancaster 1850-1852. Lord
Lieutenant E Riding Yorkshire 1847-1864.
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland 1855-1858 and
1859-1864. PC 1835  PC [I] 1835. KG 1855
5 Dec 1864 8 William George Howard 23 Feb 1808 29 Apr 1889 81
29 Apr 1889 9 George James Howard 12 Aug 1843 16 Apr 1911 67
MP for Cumberland East 1879-1885
16 Apr 1911 10 Charles James Stanley Howard 8 Mar 1867 20 Jan 1912 44
MP for Birmingham South 1904-1911
20 Jan 1912 11 George Josslyn L'Estrange Howard 6 Jan 1895 17 Feb 1963 68
17 Feb 1963 12 Charles James Ruthven Howard 21 Feb 1923 28 Nov 1994 71
He succeeded as 12th Lord Ruthven (qv) in 1982
28 Nov 1994 13 George William Beaumont Howard 15 Feb 1949
2 Nov 1987 B[L] 1 Mark Carlisle 7 Jul 1929 14 Jul 2005 76
to     Created Baron Carlisle of Bucklow for life
14 Jul 2005 2 Nov 1987
MP for Runcorn 1964-1983 and Warrington
South 1983-1987. Minister of State, Home
Office 1972-1974. Secretary of State for
Education and Science 1979-1981.  PC 1979
Peerage extinct on his death
24 Jul 1776 V[I] 1 William Henry Dawson by Nov 1712 22 Aug 1779  
Created Baron Dawson 29 May 1770
and Viscount Carlow 24 Jul 1776
22 Aug 1779 2 John Dawson 23 Aug 1744 25 Nov 1798 54
He was created Earl of Portarlington 1785
(qv) with which title this peerage then 
15 Jan 1876 V 1 Edward Montagu Stuart Granville Montagu-
Stuart-Wortley-Mackenzie,3rd Baron  15 Dec 1827 13 May 1899 71
Created Viscount Carlton and Earl of
Wharncliffe 15 Jan 1876
See "Wharncliffe"
c 1473 B[S] 1 Sir John Carlyle 1501
Created Lord Carlyle c 1473
1501 2 William Carlyle 1524
1524 3 James Carlyle 1526
1526 4 Michael Carlyle Jun 1575
Jun 1575 5 Elizabeth Douglas c 1605
c 1605 6 James Douglas
to     He resigned the peerage to the Earl of
1638 Queensberry in 1638
9 Apr 1689 M 1 Thomas Osborne,1st Earl of Danby
Created Marquess of Carmarthen
9 Apr 1689
He was subsequently created Duke of
Leeds (qv) in 1694
27 Dec 1647 B[S] 1 Sir James Carmichael,1st baronet 1579 27 Nov 1672 93
Created Lord Carmichael 27 Dec 1647
27 Nov 1672 2 John Carmichael 28 Feb 1638 20 Sep 1710 72
Created Lord Carmichael,Viscount of
Inglisberry and Nemphlar and Earl of
Hyndford 25 Jul 1701
See "Hyndford"
7 Feb 1912 B 1 Sir Thomas David Gibson-Carmichael,11th baronet 18 Mar 1859 16 Jan 1926 66
to     Created Baron Carmichael 7 Feb 1912
16 Jan 1926 MP for Midlothian 1895-1900. Governor of
Victoria 1908-1911, Madras 1911-1912 and 
Bengal 1912-1917. Lord Lieutenant 
Peebles 1920-1926
Peerage extinct on his death
10 Oct 1983 B[L] 1 Neil George Carmichael 10 Oct 1921 19 Jul 2001 79
to     Created Baron Carmichael of Kelvingrove
19 Jul 2001 for life 10 Oct 1983
MP for Woodside 1962-1974 and Kelvingrove
Peerage extinct on his death
2 Aug 1628 E 1 Robert Dormer,2nd Baron Dormer 1610 20 Sep 1643 33
Created Viscount Ascott and Earl of
Carnarvon 2 Aug 1628
Lord Lieutenant Buckingham 1641
20 Sep 1643 2 Charles Dormer 25 Oct 1632 29 Nov 1709 77
to     Peerage extinct on his death
29 Nov 1709
29 Apr 1719 M 1 James Brydges,9th Baron Chandos 6 Jan 1673 9 Aug 1744 71
Created Viscount Wilton and Earl of
Carnarvon 19 Oct 1714, and Marquess
of Carnarvon and Duke of Chandos
29 Apr 1719
The creations of 1714 contained a special 
remainder,failing the heirs male of his body,to
those of his late father,together his two sons
John and Henry
See "Chandos"
3 Jul 1793 E 1 Henry Herbert 20 Aug 1741 3 Jun 1811 69
Created Baron Porchester 17 Oct 1780
and Earl of Carnarvon 3 Jul 1793
MP for Wilton 1768-1780. PC 1806
3 Jun 1811 2 Henry George Herbert 3 Jun 1772 16 Apr 1833 60
MP for Cricklade 1794-1811
16 Apr 1833 3 Henry John George Herbert 8 Jun 1800 10 Dec 1849 49
MP for Wootton Basset 1831-1832
10 Dec 1849 4 Henry Howard Molyneux Herbert 24 Jun 1831 28 Jun 1890 59
Secretary of State for Colonies 1866-1867
and 1874-1878. Lord Lieutenant of Ireland
1885-1887. Lord Lieutenant Hampshire
1887-1890.  PC 1866
28 Jun 1890 5 George Edward Stanhope Molyneux Herbert 26 Jun 1866 5 Apr 1923 56
5 Apr 1923 6 Henry George Alfred Marius Victor
Francis Herbert 7 Nov 1898 22 Sep 1987 88
22 Sep 1987 7 Henry George Reginald Molyneux Herbert 19 Jan 1924 11 Sep 2001 77
[Elected hereditary peer 1999-2001]
11 Sep 2001 8 George Reginald Oliver Molyneux Herbert 10 Nov 1956
14 Apr 1616 B[S] 1 David Carnegie 1575 Feb 1658 82
Created Lord Carnegie of Kinnaird
14 Apr 1616,and Lord Carnegie of
Kinnaird and Leuchars and Earl of
Southesk 22 Jun 1633
See "Southesk"
14 Jul 1982 B[L] 1 Elizabeth Patricia Carnegy 28 Apr 1925 9 Nov 2010 85
to     Created Baroness Carnegy of Lour for life
9 Nov 2010 14 Jul 1982
Peerage extinct on her death
27 Jun 1916 B 1 Sir Arthur Nicolson,11th baronet 19 Sep 1849 5 Nov 1928 79
Created Baron Carnock 27 Jun 1916
PC 1905
5 Nov 1928 2 Frederick Archibald Nicolson 9 Jan 1883 3 May 1952 69
3 May 1952 3 Erskine Arthur Nicolson 26 Mar 1884 2 Oct 1982 98
2 Oct 1982 4 David Henry Arthur Nicolson 10 Jul 1920 26 Dec 2008 88
26 Dec 2008 5 Adam Nicolson 12 Sep 1957
21 Apr 1639 E[S] 1 Robert Dalzell 1639
Created Lord of Dalzell 18 Sep 1628
and Earl of Carnwath 21 Apr 1639
1639 2 Robert Dalzell 21 Jun 1654
21 Jun 1654 3 Gavin Dalzell Jun 1674
Jun 1674 4 James Dalzell 1683
1683 5 John Dalzell 7 Jun 1702
7 Jun 1702 6 Sir Robert Dalzell,3rd baronet c 1687 4 Aug 1737
to     He was attainted and the peerage forfeited.
19 Jan 1716 But for the attainder the descent was -
4 Aug 1737 [7] Alexander Dalzell 2 Feb 1722 3 Apr 1787 65
3 Apr 1787 [8] Robert Dalzell 1755 13 Feb 1808 52
13 Feb 1808 [9] John Dalzell 18 Aug 1795 10 Oct 1814 19
10 Oct 1814 10 Robert Alexander Dalzell 13 Feb 1768 1 Jan 1839 70
He obtained a reversal of the attainder
26 May 1826
1 Jan 1839 11 Thomas Henry Dalzell 2 Sep 1797 14 Dec 1867 70
14 Dec 1867 12 Henry Arthur Hew Dalzell 12 Apr 1858 13 Mar 1873 14
13 Mar 1873 13 Arthur Alexander Dalzell 15 Sep 1799 28 Apr 1875 75
28 Apr 1875 14 Harry Burrard Dalzell 11 Nov 1804 1 Nov 1887 82
1 Nov 1887 15 Robert Harris Carnwath Dalzell 1 Jul 1847 8 Mar 1910 62
8 Mar 1910 16 Ronald Arthur Dalzell 3 Jun 1883 11 Jul 1931 48
11 Jul 1931 17 Arthur Edward Dalzell 25 Dec 1851 9 Mar 1941 89
to     Peerage extinct or dormant on his death
9 Mar 1941
29 May 1719 B[I] 1 George Carpenter 10 Feb 1657 10 Feb 1732 75
Created Baron Carpenter 29 May 1719
MP for Whitchurch 1715-1722 and Westminster
10 Feb 1732 2 George Carpenter c 1695 12 Jul 1749
MP for Morpeth 1714 and 1722, and 
Weobly 1741-1747
12 Jul 1749 3 George Carpenter 26 Aug 1723 9 Mar 1762 38
He was created Earl of Tyrconnel (qv) 1761
with which title this peerage then merged
15 Jan 1976 B[L] 1 Leonard Robert Carr 11 Nov 1916 17 Feb 2012 95
to     Created Baron Carr of Hadley for life
17 Feb 2012 15 Jan 1976
MP for Mitcham 1950-1974 and Carshalton
1974-1976. Secretary of State for
Employment 1970-1972, Lord President of
the Council 1972, Home Secretary 1972-
1974. PC 1963
Peerage extinct on his death
CARRICK (Ireland)
10 Jun 1748 E[I] 1 Somerset Hamilton Butler,8th Viscount of
Ikerrin 6 Sep 1719 15 Apr 1774 54
Created Earl of Carrick 10 Jun 1748
PC [I] 1746
15 Apr 1774 2 Henry Thomas Butler 19 May 1746 20 Jul 1813 67
20 Jul 1813 3 Somerset Richard Butler 28 Sep 1779 4 Feb 1838 58
4 Feb 1838 4 Henry Thomas Butler 19 Feb 1834 16 Apr 1846 12
16 Apr 1846 5 Somerset Arthur Butler 30 Jan 1835 22 Dec 1901 66
22 Dec 1901 6 Charles Henry Somerset Butler 5 Aug 1851 6 Apr 1909 57
6 Apr 1909 7 Charles Ernest Alfred French
Somerset Butler 15 Nov 1873 2 Nov 1931 57
Created Baron Butler 8 Jul 1912
2 Nov 1931 8 Theobald Walter Somerset Henry Butler 23 May 1903 31 Jul 1957 54
31 Jul 1957 9 Brian Stuart Theobald Somerset
Caher Butler 17 Aug 1931 5 Oct 1992 61
5 Oct 1992 10 David James Theobald Somerset Butler 9 Jan 1953 8 Jan 2008 54
8 Jan 2008 11 Arion Thomas Piers Hamilton Butler 1 Sep 1975
CARRICK (Scotland)
c 1186 E[S] 1 Duncan c 1250
Created Earl of Carrick c 1186
c 1250 2 Neil 1256
1256 3 Margaret de Bruce 1292
1292 4 Robert de Bruce 11 Jul 1274 6 Jun 1329 54
to     He became King of Scotland as Robert I in
1306 1306 when the peerage merged with the
c 1314 E[S] 1 Sir Edward de Bruce 5 Oct 1318
to     Created Earl of Carrick c 1314
5 Oct 1318 Brother of Robert I
On his death the peerage reverted to the
1328 E[S] 1 David de Bruce 5 Mar 1324 22 Feb 1371 46
to     Created Earl of Carrick 1328
7 Jun 1329 Son of Robert I
He became King of Scotland as David II
in 1329 when the peerage merged with the
c 1330 E[S] 1 Alexander de Bruce 18 Jul 1333
to     Created Earl of Carrick c 1330
18 Jul 1333 On his death the peerage reverted to the
c 1361 E[S] 1 Sir William de Cunynghame by 1364
to     Created Earl of Carrick c 1361
by 1364 On his death the peerage reverted to the
22 Jun 1368 E[S] 1 John Stewart c 1337 4 Apr 1406
to     Created Earl of Carrick 22 Jun 1368
13 Apr 1390 Son of Robert II
He became King of Scotland as Robert III
in 1390 when the peerage merged with the
19 Apr 1390 E[S] 1 David Stewart 1378 26 Mar 1402 23
to     Created Earl of Carrick 19 Apr 1390
26 Mar 1402 On his death the peerage reverted to the
10 Dec 1404 E[S] 1 James Stewart Jul 1394 21 Feb 1437 42
to     Created Earl of Carrick 10 Dec 1404
4 Apr 1406 He became King of Scotland as James I
in 1406 when the peerage merged with the
By Act of Parliament 1469 it was decreed 
that the Earldom of Carrick should be
annexed forever to the first-born princes
of the Kings of Scotland. See the Dukedom
of Rothesay.
CARRICK (in Orkney)
22 Jul 1628 E[S] 1 John Stewart 1652
to     Created Lord Kincleven 20 Aug 1607
1652 and Earl of Carrick 22 Jul 1628
Peerages extinct on his death
26 May 2011 B 1 HRH Prince William of Wales (William Arthur
Philip Louis) 21 Jun 1982
Created Baron Carrickfergus,Earl of Strathearn
and Duke of Cambridge 26 May 2011
See "Cambridge"
31 Oct 1643 V[I] 1 Sir Charles Smyth 1598 21 Feb 1665 66
Created Baron Carrington 31 Oct 1643
and Viscount Carrington 4 Nov 1643
21 Feb 1665 2 Francis Smith c 1621 7 Apr 1701
Lord Lieutenant Worcester 1687-1689
7 Apr 1701 3 Charles Carington (or Smith) 5 Jul 1635 17 May 1706 70
to     Peerage extinct on his death
17 May 1706
11 Jul 1796 B[I] 1 Robert Smith 22 Jan 1752 18 Sep 1838 86
20 Oct 1797 B 1 Created Baron Carrington [I] 11 Jul
1796 and Baron Carrington 20 Oct 1797
MP for Nottingham 1779-1797
18 Sep 1838 2 Robert John Carrington 16 Jan 1796 17 Mar 1868 72
MP for Wendover 1818-1820,Buckinghamshire
1820-1821 and Wycombe 1831-1838. Lord
Lieutenant Buckingham 1839-1868
17 Mar 1868 3 Charles Robert Carington 16 May 1843 13 Jun 1928 85
16 Jul 1895 E 1 Created Viscount Wendover and Earl
to     Carrington 16 Jul 1895 and Marquess
13 Jun 1928 of Lincolnshire 26 Feb 1912
MP for Wycombe 1865-1868. Governor of
NSW 1886-1890. President of the Board of
Agriculture 1905-1911. Lord Privy Seal
1911-1912. PC 1881  KG 1906
For further information on an incident in this peer's
youth,see the note at the foot of this page
The Earldom became extinct on his death
whilst the Baronies passed to -
13 Jun 1928 4 Rupert Clement George Carington 18 Dec 1852 11 Nov 1929 76
MP for Buckinghamshire 1880-1885
11 Nov 1929 5 Rupert Victor John Carington 20 Dec 1891 19 Nov 1938 46
19 Nov 1938 6 Peter Alexander Rupert Carington 6 Jun 1919 9 Jul 2018 99
17 Nov 1999 B[L] 1 First Lord of the Admiralty 1959-1963. 
to     Minister Without Portfolio 1963-1964. 
9 Jul 2018 Secretary of State for Defence 1970-1974.
Secretary of State for Energy 1974. 
Secretary of State for Foreign and
Commonwealth Affairs 1979-1982.  PC 1959
CH 1983  KG 1985
Created Baron Carington of Upton for life
17 Nov 1999 (extinct on his death)
9 Jul 2018 7 Rupert Francis John Carington 2 Dec 1948
[Elected hereditary peer 2018-     ]
11 Sep 2013 B[L] 1 Matthew Hadrian Marshall Carrington 19 Oct 1947
Created Baron Carrington of Fulham for life
11 Sep 2013
MP for Fulham 1987-1997
11 Jul 1967 B[L] 1 Sir William John Carron 19 Nov 1902 3 Dec 1969 67
to     Created Baron Carron for life 11 Jul 1967
3 Dec 1969 Peerage extinct on his death
1 Jun 1921 B[L] 1 Sir Edward Henry Carson 9 Feb 1854 22 Oct 1935 81
to     Created Baron Carson for life 1 Jun 1921
22 Oct 1935 MP for Dublin University 1892-1918.
and Duncairn 1918-1921.
Solicitor General for Ireland 1892
Solicitor General 1900-1905. Attorney
General 1915-1916. First Lord of the
Admiralty 1916-1917. Lord of Appeal in
Ordinary 1921-1929. PC [I] 1896, PC 1905
Peerage extinct on his death
12 Jan 2004 B[L] 1 Robert Douglas Carswell 28 Jun 1934
Created Baron Carswell for life 12 Jan 2004
Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland
1997-2004. Lord of Appeal in Ordinary 
2004-2009    PC 1993
23 Mar 1987 B[L] 1 Denis Victor Carter 17 Jan 1932 18 Dec 2006 74
to     Created Baron Carter for life 23 Mar 1987
18 Dec 2006 PC 1997
Peerage extinct on his death
15 Oct 2008 B[L] 1 Stephen Carter 12 Feb 1964
Created Baron Carter of Barnes for life 
15 Oct 2008
8 Jun 2004 B[L] 1 Patrick Robert Carter 9 Feb 1946
Created Baron Carter of Coles for life
8 Jun 2004
30 Oct 2019 B[L] 1 Harold Mark Carter
Created Baron Carter of Haslemere for life
30 Oct 2019
19 Oct 1681 B 1 Sir George Carteret,2nd baronet 1669 22 Sep 1695 26
Created Baron Carteret 19 Oct 1681
22 Sep 1695 2 John Carteret 22 Apr 1690 2 Jan 1763 72
He succeeded his mother as 2nd Earl Granville (qv)
in 1744 (see below)
2 Jan 1763 3 Robert Carteret,3rd Earl Granville 21 Sep 1721 13 Feb 1776 54
Peerages extinct on his death
1 Jan 1715 V 1 Grace Carteret 1667 18 Oct 1744 77
Created Viscountess Carteret and Countess
  Granville 1 Jan 1715
The creation of the Viscountcy (but not the 
Earldom) contained a special remainder,failing
the heirs male of her body,to her husband's
brother,Edward Carteret
See "Granville"
29 Jan 1784 B 1 Henry Frederick Thynne 17 Nov 1735 17 Jun 1826 90
Created Baron Carteret 29 Jan 1784
For details of the special remainder included
in this creation, see the note at the foot of
this page
MP for Staffordshire 1757-1761
Postmaster General 1771-1789  PC 1770  
17 Jun 1826 2 George Thynne 23 Jan 1770 19 Feb 1838 68
MP for Weobly 1790-1812  PC 1804
19 Feb 1838 3 John Thynne 28 Dec 1772 10 Mar 1849 76
to     MP for Bath 1796-1832  PC 1804
10 Mar 1849 Peerage extinct on his death
15 Jul 1977 B[L] 1 Sir (Richard) Michael Power Carver 24 Apr 1915 9 Dec 2001 86
to     Created Baron Carver for life 15 Jul 1977
9 Dec 2001 Field Marshal 1973. Chief of the Defence Staff
Peerage extinct on his death
14 Nov 1620 B[S] 1 Sir Henry Cary c 1575 25 Sep 1633
Created Lord Carye and Viscount of 
Falkland 14 Nov 1620
See "Falkland"
23 Jan 1752 B[I] 1 John Proby 25 Nov 1720 18 Oct 1772 51
Created Baron Carysfort 23 Jan 1752
MP for Stamford 1747-1754 and
Huntingdonshire 1754-1768. PC [I] 1758
18 Oct 1772 2 John Joshua Proby 12 Aug 1751 7 Apr 1828 76
18 Aug 1789 E[I] 1 Created Earl of Carysfort 18 Aug 1789
21 Jan 1801 B 1 and Baron Carysfort 21 Jan 1801
MP for East Looe 1790 and Stamford 1790-
1801. KP 1784. PC [I] 1789. PC 1806
7 Apr 1828 2 John Proby 1780 11 Jun 1855 74
MP for Buckingham 1805-1806 and
Huntingdonshire 1806-1807 and 1814-1818
11 Jun 1855 3 Granville Leveson Proby 12 Nov 1782 3 Nov 1868 85
MP for Wicklow 1816-1829
3 Nov 1868 4 Granville Leveson Proby 14 Sep 1824 18 May 1872 47
MP for Wicklow 1858-1868. PC 1859 
KP 1869
18 May 1872 5 William Proby 18 Jan 1836 4 Sep 1909 73
to     Lord Lieutenant Wicklow 1890-1909
4 Sep 1909 KP 1874
Peerages extinct on his death
16 May 1960 B[L] 1 Richard Gardiner Casey 29 Aug 1890 17 Jun 1976 85
to     Created Baron Casey for life 16 May 1960
17 Jun 1976 Governor of Bengal 1940-1946. Governor
General of Australia 1965-1969
PC 1939  CH 1944  KG 1969
Peerage extinct on his death
23 Sep 2014 B[L] 1 Michael Maurice Cashman 17 Dec 1950
Created Baron Cashman for life 23 Sep 2014
29 May 1680 B[S] 1 John Leslie,7th Earl of Rothes 1630 27 Jul 1681 51
to     Created Lord Auchmotie and
27 Jul 1681 Caskieberry,Viscount of Lugtoun,Earl 
of Leslie,Marquess of Ballinbreich and
Duke of Rothes 29 May 1680
Peerage extinct on his death
c 1509 E[S] 1 David Kennedy,3rd Lord Kennedy 9 Sep 1513
Created Earl of Cassillis c 1509
9 Sep 1513 2 Gilbert Kennedy 22 Dec 1527
22 Dec 1527 3 Gilbert Kennedy 1515 28 Nov 1558 43
28 Nov 1558 4 Gilbert Kennedy c 1541 Dec 1576
For further information on this peer,see the
note at the foot of this page
Dec 1576 5 John Kennedy c 1573 Oct 1615
Oct 1615 6 John Kennedy Apr 1668
Apr 1668 7 John Kennedy 23 Jul 1701
23 Jul 1701 8 John Kennedy Apr 1700 7 Aug 1759 59
7 Aug 1759 9 Sir Thomas Kennedy,4th baronet 30 Nov 1775
30 Nov 1775 10 David Kennedy c 1730 18 Dec 1792
MP for Ayrshire 1768-1774
18 Dec 1792 11 Archibald Kennedy 30 Dec 1794
30 Dec 1794 12 Archibald Kennedy
He was created Marquess of Ailsa 1831 (qv)
with which title this peerage then merged
18 Jun 1974 B[L] 1 Edward Cyril Castle 5 May 1907 26 Dec 1979 72
to     Created Baron Castle for life 18 Jun 1974
26 Dec 1979 Peerage extinct on his death
16 Jul 1990 B[L] 1 Barbara Anne Castle 6 Oct 1911 3 May 2002 90
to     Created Baroness Castle of Blackburn
3 May 2002 for life 16 Jul 1990
MP for Blackburn 1945-1950 and 1955-1979
and Blackburn East 1950-1955. Minister of
Overseas Development 1964-1965. Minister
of Transport 1965-1968. Secretary of State
for Employment 1968-1970. Secretary of
State for Social Services 1974-1976
PC 1964
Peerage extinct on her death
15 Mar 1707 V[I] 1 Sir Christopher Wandesford,2nd baronet 19 Aug 1656 15 Sep 1707 51
Created Baron Wandesford and 
Viscount Castlecomer 15 Mar 1707
PC [I] 1695
15 Sep 1707 2 Christopher Wandesford 2 Mar 1684 23 Jun 1719 35
MP for Morpeth 1710-1713 and Ripon 1715-19
Secretary at War 1718  PC [I] 1710
23 Jun 1719 3 Christopher Wandesford 1717 10 May 1736 18
10 May 1736 4 George Wandesford 22 Sep 1687 25 Jun 1751 63
25 Jun 1751 5 John Wandesford 24 May 1725 12 Jan 1784 58
to     Created Earl Wandesford (qv) 1758
12 Jan 1784 Peerage extinct on his death
31 Jul 1800 B[I] 1 Charles Henry Coote,7th Earl of Mountrath 1725 1 Mar 1802 76
Created Baron Castle Coote 
31 Jul 1800
For details of the special remainder included in the
creation of this peerage,see the note at the 
foot of this page
On his death the Earldom of Mountrath 
became extinct whilst the Barony 
passed to - 
1 Mar 1802 2 Charles Henry Coote 25 Aug 1754 22 Jan 1823 68
MP for Queens County 1801-1802. PC [I] 1800
22 Jan 1823 3 Eyre Coote 21 Sep 1793 Apr 1827 33
to     Peerage extinct on his death
Apr 1827
20 Dec 1793 V[I] 1 Otway Cuffe,1st Viscount Desart 1737 9 Aug 1804 67
Created Viscount Castle Cuffe and 
Earl of Desart 20 Dec 1793
See "Desart"
27 Oct 1733 B[I] 1 William Flower 11 Mar 1685 29 Apr 1746 61
Created Baron Castle Durrow
27 Oct 1733
PC [I] 1735
29 Apr 1746 2 Henry Flower
He was created Viscount Ashbrook 1751 (qv)
with which title this peerage then merged
6 Sep 1616 E[I] 1 George Tuchet,11th Baron Audley 1551 20 Feb 1617 65
Created Baron Audley and Earl of 
Castlehaven 6 Sep 1616
20 Feb 1617 2 Mervyn Tuchet 1593 14 May 1631 37
For further information on this peer, see the
note at the foot of this page.
14 May 1631 3 James Tuchet c 1617 11 Oct 1684
11 Oct 1684 4 Mervyn Tuchet 2 Nov 1686
2 Nov 1686 5 James Tuchet 12 Aug 1700
12 Aug 1700 6 James Tuchet 12 Oct 1740
12 Oct 1740 7 James Tuchet 15 Apr 1723 8 May 1769 46
8 May 1769 8 John Talbot Tuchet 2 Aug 1724 22 Apr 1777 52
to     Peerage extinct on his death
22 Apr 1777
21 Oct 1861 B 1 Anne Sutherland-Leveson-Gower 21 Apr 1829 25 Nov 1888 59
Created Baroness Macleod,Baroness
Castlehaven,Viscountess Tarbat and
Countess of Cromartie 21 Oct 1861
See "Cromartie"
11 Dec 1661 E[I] 1 Roger Palmer 4 Sep 1634 28 Jul 1705 70
to     Created Baron of Limerick and Earl of 
28 Jul 1705 Castlemaine 11 Dec 1661
PC 1686
Peerage extinct on his death
24 Apr 1718 V[I] 1 Sir Richard Child (later Tylney) 5 Feb 1680 Mar 1750 70
Created Baron Newtown and Viscount
Castlemaine 24 Apr 1718  and Earl 
Tylney of Castlemaine 11 Jun 1731
MP for Essex 1710-1722 and 1727-1734
Mar 1750 2 John Tylney 22 Oct 1712 17 Sep 1784 71
to     Peerages extinct on his death
17 Sep 1784
24 Dec 1812 B[I] 1 William Handcock 28 Aug 1761 7 Jan 1839 77
12 Jan 1822 V[I] 1 Created Baron Castlemaine 24 Dec
to     1812 and Viscount Castlemaine 
7 Jan 1839 12 Jan 1822
The creation of the Barony of 1812 contained a
special remainder,failing heirs male of his body,to
his brother,Richard Handcock
MP for Athlone 1802-1803.  PC [I] 1801
On his death the Viscountcy became
extinct whilst the Barony passed to -
7 Jan 1839 2 Richard Handcock 14 May 1767 18 Apr 1840 72
MP for Athlone 1800
18 Apr 1840 3 Richard Handcock 17 Nov 1791 4 Jul 1869 77
MP for Athlone 1826-1832
4 Jul 1869 4 Richard Handcock 25 Jul 1826 26 Apr 1892 65
Lord Lieutenant Westmeath 1889-1892
26 Apr 1892 5 Albert Edward Handcock 26 Mar 1863 6 Jul 1937 74
Lord Lieutenant Westmeath 1899-1922
6 Jul 1937 6 Robert Arthur Handcock 19 Apr 1864 31 May 1954 90
31 May 1954 7 John Michael Schomberg Staveley
Handcock 10 Mar 1904 31 Jul 1973 69
31 Jul 1973 8 Roland Thomas John Handcock 22 Apr 1943
20 Mar 1756 B[I] 1 Henry Boyle 1682 28 Dec 1764 82
Created Baron of Castle Martyr,
Viscount Boyle of Bandon and Earl of
Shannon 20 Mar 1756
See "Shannon"
1 Oct 1795 V[I] 1 Robert Stewart 27 Sep 1739 8 Apr 1821 81
Created Baron Londonderry
20 Sep 1789, Viscount Castlereagh
1 Oct 1795,Earl of Londonderry 
17 Aug 1796 and Marquess of
Londonderry 13 Jan 1816
See "Londonderry"
The Carlingford "Peerage" Case
In "The Complete Peerage," there is a footnote to this title which states that "the title was 
assumed about the middle of the 19th century by Godwin Meade Pratt Swifte, of Swiftesheath, 
co. Kilkenny, who was descended from Thomas Swift, eldest brother of the half blood to William 
Swift of Rotherham, grandfather of Viscount Carlingford."
This case was commonly referred to the contemporary Press as "the Carlingford Peerage case."
This, however, is misleading - the case should be better described as "Swifte v. Swifte," since
the legal battle was over the plaintiff's entitlement to participate in the personal estate of his 
dead father. At no time was any attempt made to obtain recognition of the plaintiff's right to be
acknowledged as "Viscount Carlingford."
The case occupied large sections of the newspapers of the time, and I have therefore sought out
those reports which best convey the facts of the case, commencing with the "Daily Mail" of 2
November 1905:-
'There commenced before the Irish Master of the Rolls [Sir Andrew Porter] at Dublin yesterday a 
trial which has been long pending, and which involves the possession of the estates and title of 
the Carlingford peerage, which has been dormant for some years.
'The plaintiff is George Godwin Barnham Swifte, who claims to be the lawful child of a former Lord
Carlingford, and as such entitled to a share of the estate at present held by Mary Jane Swifte
and Godwin Butler Meade Swifte. The latter is now Master of Swiftesheath, a fine old mansion 
with an extensive and picturesque estate in County Kilkenny.
'Counsel for the plaintiff said that the peerage was dormant and Mr. Swifte claimed it, but had
never prosecuted his claim in the House of Lords. In 1842 Lord Carlingford secretly married Miss
Jane Hopkins, daughter of the late Captain Hopkins, of the 76th Regiment, and in 1845 the parties
were publicly married in Liverpool.
'Two children were born of that marriage - Longueville Meade Swifte and the plaintiff. Viscountess
Carlingford, otherwise Hopkins, died in 1848. Lord Carlingford subsequently, in 1863, married the
defendant, Mary Jane Swifte. The defence, said counsel, had been raised by this lady that the
plaintiff, his brother Longueville, and his sister, were not lawful children of their father, because
he had openly committed bigamy by marrying Miss Hopkins - a previous marriage having been
effected by Lord Carlingford with Baroness de Wetzlar, which was still existing.
'The plaintiff submitted that the Court of Probate in Ireland had declared Lord Carlingford to be
the lawful husband of [the] plaintiff's mother. It was a very significant incident that when the
second marriage took place in Liverpool, one of the wedding presents was from Baroness de
Wetzlar, who was alleged by the defendant to be the first wife of Lord Carlingford. After that
marriage Lord and Lady Carlingford resided in Dublin, and plaintiff and his brother were recognised
as their lawful children. Counsel referred to an elder sister of the plaintiff, who was presented at
the first Drawing Room after the death of the Prince Consort as the Hon. Julia Ianthe Swifte, and
who afterwards married Dr. O'Flaherty, an eminent London physician.
'When sixteen years of age the plaintiff was asked to sign indentures to enter a ship called the
Sandringham. He refused to do so, and went to his sister in London. Before the ship sailed from
Plymouth, the plaintiff went down to join the vessel, but the captain refused to take him on
board. After a time the plaintiff was put on board the Royal Alice, and sailed for Australia, with
directions to join the Sandringham there; but again the captain refused to take him.
'When in Calcutta, on board the Royal Alice, he heard accidentally of his father's death, which
took place in July 1864. It so happened that the Sandringham was also at Calcutta, and left port
with 700 coolies. It was her last voyage, as she was lost with all hands, except the captain and
his wife.
'Counsel had not concluded his argument when the court rose.'
Upon the resumption of the hearing, the "Daily Mail" of 3 November 1905 reported:-
'When the hearing of the legitimacy suit of Swifte v. Swifte was resumed by the Master of the 
Rolls at Dublin yesterday, very interesting evidence was given by the plaintiff, George Godwin
Barnham Swifte.
'He claims the dormant Carlingford peerage; but in this suit only seeks a declaration that the
personal estate of the late Godwin Meade Pratt Swifte, commonly known as Lord Carlingford, was
divisible between himself, his deceased brother, Longueville Meade Swifte, and one of the defend-
ants, Godwin B.M. Swifte; and a declaration that the second defendant, Mrs. May [Mary?] Jane
Swifte, was liable to make good and pay to the plaintiff and to the legal personal representative
of Longueville M. Swifte the full amount of their shares. The total yearly value of the property in
dispute is stated to be about £20,000.
'Mr. Swifte, in the course of examination, said that his father, who was generally known as Lord
Carlingford, was named Gordon [Godwin?] Meade Pratt Swifte. He produced the certificate of his
father's marriage with Jane Anne Hopkins in Liverpool on March 18, 1846. The witness was born
January 10, 1847. The birth and baptismal certificates of himself and his brother Longueville were
produced. His father told him he had gone through the ceremony of marriage with his wife in 1842,
and that the marriage was registered at Doctors' Commons, but that it was technically irregular.
At the same time he thought it was perfectly legal.
'The witness also produced his schoolbooks, in which his name was entered as the Hon. George
Swifte. His mother died in 1847, and his father married Miss Clarke in 1863. The witness and his
brothers and sister lived in the house afterwards as members of the family. When his father 
returned from the honeymoon he had a conversation with Harold, one of his (witness's) brothers,
in the ball-room. Harold on that occasion refused to go to sea, or to California, informing his
father at the same time that he was heir to the title and property. His father replied that he was
sorry Harold was not the heir, as he was born before the Liverpool marriage; and he added that
Longueville was the heir.
'Harold left to reside in another part of the country, and the property, which had till then been
managed by him, was taken in charge by Eldon Clarke. About a week after that witness went to
'At a later period, when he saw his father declining in health, he asked him to allow him £100 a
year. His father replied, "Oh, that's nothing. You will be very well off." In reply to a further 
question by the witness, his father said, "Harold is not my heir. Your brother Longueville is." His
father had always claimed the title, but never asserted his right to it. He was about to do so
when he died.
'He went on to tell how he was supplied with a sea-chest inscribed "The Hon. G.B. Swifte" and
told to go to sea; how he ran away and hid in a plantation, and how the captain of the Sandring-
ham, when the plaintiff at last went to Plymouth to join the ship, refused to allow him on board.
Then he joined the Royal Alice, and found the Sandringham at Calcutta and heard of his father's
death. The Sandringham after went down with 700 coolies on board, and when Mr. Swifte went
home Mrs. Swifte said they had supposed he was lost with the ship.
'The Solicitor-General: Did you give any instructions for formulating a charge against the defend-
ant, Mrs. Swifte, of having, with the assistance of her relatives, endeavoured to entrap you to
get into a ship the captain of which was to scuttle it? - Oh, no. An unseaworthy ship. And
consequently to drown you? - If she was lost. And she was lost. And was it done for the express
purpose? Is that the charge you have made? - There is great suspicion about it. To secure your
death? - That was the suspicion. Do you charge that today? - Well, as far as suspicion goes, I
was told on board the other vessel that I was sent away to be got rid of.
'Mrs. O'Flaherty, sister of the plaintiff and widow of Dr. O'Flaherty, a London physician, said she
was the daughter of the late Godwin Swifte, commonly called Viscount Carlingford. At the first
Drawing Room held after the death of the Prince Consort Lord Carlisle was Lord Lieutenant [1859-
1864], and she was presented as the Hon. Miss Swifte. Her father attended the Levee, and she
thought there was some demur about him being presented as Lord Carlingford. He was ushered in
as Godwin Swifte, Esq., and he said, "No. I am Lord Carlingford." She was taken to the vault
where her mother was buried, and her father pointed out the coffin with the name Viscountess
'Her father told her everything about the marriage with the Baroness de Wetzlar. He said that her
mother did not like the way in which she and her father were living. She was a Roman Catholic,
and they were married by a Roman Catholic priest just to ease her conscience, and that her papa
'He said that he then went to Naples, where he was always considered a bachelor and moved in
the highest circles. It was given out that he was a married man, and he was angry about it. He
told her that he came home and then married her mother. He said that the divorce [marriage to
Baroness de Wetzlar?] was annulled and that the deeds proving it were in a tin box under his bed.
'The court then adjourned.'
Extracted from the Derby "Daily Telegraph" of 4 November 1905:-
'The Solicitor-General then opened the case for the defendants, stating he would prove that in 
1833, in the parish chapel at Loitsch, in Austria, according to the most strict formalities of the
Austrian law, the parish priest celebrated a marriage between Lord Carlingford and Baroness de
Wetzlar. There was nothing at the time to prevent the marriage taking place in Ireland, for the
penal law in force at the time only prohibited a priest from celebrating a marriage between a
Protestant and a Roman Catholic. Counsel contended that this marriage was valid, and that 
therefore the plaintiff's case failed. Ernest Swifte, divisional police magistrate, Dublin, and a
cousin of the defendant, said in August last year he went to Loitsch, in Austria, and found in the
Parish Church register an entry of the marriage of Lord Carlingford and the Baroness de Wetzlar
in 1833. He subsequently obtained a copy of the certificate of the death of the Baroness in 1856.
Witness produced copies of both documents.'
Judgment was finally given on 15 November and fully reported in the "Daily Telegraph" of 16 
November 1905:-
'The Master of the Rolls delivered judgment, yesterday, in Dublin, in the case of Swifte v. Swifte,
in which the plaintiff, George Barnham Swifte sought a declaration that he was a lawful son of the
late Godwin Pratt Swifte, commonly called Lord Carlingford, of Swifte's Heath, Kilkenny, and as 
such entitled to a share in the personal estate of his deceased father. Mrs. Swifte, the widow,
contested the claim, on the ground that when her late husband married the plaintiff's mother he
had a lawful wife alive in Austria.
'His lordship, in the course of an exhaustive judgment, which occupied an hour and three quarters
in delivery, stated the causes of action. The amount of money which, in any event, represented
the share of the personal estate to which, in his own view, the plaintiff was entitled would be a
relatively small sum. That was the matter in respect of which the action was brought. No question
and no claim to a peerage arose, or could arise, in the action. It was perfectly clear that no 
peerage whatever was involved, and his lordship would not, as he had done during the hearing,
give people a title or a name to which no right had been shown. It was not an action for the
recovery of large estates, nor, except in the case which was commenced by the same plaintiff in
1884, had any claim been put forward to the real estate. 
'The circumstances of the present case were somewhat peculiar. They had been called romantic, 
but so far as his lordship's functions were concerned he had only to deal with a question of the
legal rights of the parties. The facts of the case were only conversant with the transactions of
Mr. Godwin Pratt Swifte, who was born, apparently, about 1808. He came into possession of the
family estates, and, as was the custom of that period when a young man reached a certain age,
he went abroad on what was called the grand tour. When in Austria he met a lady who was called
the Baroness von Wetzlar and there could be no doubt that she was a person of good family. Her
father was the Baron von Wetzlar, and her mother had been the Countess von Egb. When Mr.
Godwin Pratt Swifte met her they formed an acquaintance which ripened into intimacy, the 
precise character of which his lordship did not care to go into. He had no evidence one way or the 
other about it, although there were some statements made at the Bar in reference to it.
'Whether their acquaintance was unduly intimate or perfectly harmless, there was no doubt that
on Feb. 3, 1833, he was married to her in the Catholic Church at St. Loitsch, in Austria, by the
parish priest. That marriage has been proved as a matter of fact beyond all question. She was
his lawful wedded wife unless the marriage was invalidated by circumstances which were so very
much pressed at the Bar, founded on the provisions in the penal code. They appeared to have
separated; whether they intended to separate permanently or not his lordship did not know. 
'Having returned to this country the husband undoubtedly contracted another marriage on March
18, 1845, with a Miss Jane Ann Hopkins, a young lady who occupied a respectable position in
society. She was married regularly in Liverpool Parish Church. The first wife, the Baroness von
Wetzlar, was beyond all question living at that time, for she did not die till Jan. 30, 1859. If the
first marriage, there fore, was valid, and was not determined by divorce or some other equivalent,
the marriage of 1845 was illegal and void.
'At the time of the 1845 marriage there were two children of Godwin Pratt Swifte and Jane 
Hopkins, born before the Liverpool marriage, one of them named Harold and the other a daughter,
who was respectably married in London, and his lordship wished to say, in speaking of these
things, that he desired most strongly to emphasize his opinion that there was nothing discredit-
able to either of these children as regards their birth. If they were illegitimate no one, under the
circumstances of the case, would refrain from sympathising with them. 
'Longueville Swifte, the third child of this union, was born on May 9, 1845, a couple of months
after the marriage of his parents in Liverpool. The plaintiff, George Barnham Swifte, was the fourth
child of the same marriage, the second that was born in wedlock, assuming the marriage in 
Liverpool was a legal marriage. Then Longueville would have ranked as the eldest son of his
parents, notwithstanding the existence of the boy Harold. Longueville died somewhere about 
1871, and therefore at that time, if the Liverpool marriage was a good one, the plaintiff would
have become entitled as heir-at-law to his father's estate. Jane Ann Hopkins having died on Aug.
14, 1847, the husband, so far as the marriage with her was concerned, was free to contract
another, and he did contract a marriage with Mary Jane Clarke in February, 1863. Apart altogether
from every other question in the case, there could be none as to the validity of that marriage,
because the Baroness von Wetzlar was then dead some four years and Jane Ann Hopkins was also
dead. Of the marriage with Mary Jane Clarke there was issue only one son, Godwin Swifte, who
had been joined as a co-defendant. His father, Godwin Pratt Swifte, died on July 14, 1864, 
'His lordship held that the Austrian marriage was legal. It was not celebrated in Ireland between
British subjects. If it had been the Act of George II would have applied. It was celebrated in
Austria and as had been sworn to by lawyers from that country was in strict conformity with the
laws of Austria [and as a result the plaintiff was illegitimate].
'Turning to the allegations implied against the defendant in the interrogatories administered to
her by the plaintiff, the Master of the Rolls said they amounted to a shameful and scandalous
abuse of the process of the Court. They alleged, for instance, that the defendant conspired 
with others to murder the plaintiff by having him put to sea in an unseaworthy vessel with a
disreputable captain. How, he asked, was a lady living in Kilkenny to know that a certain vessel
was seaworthy or not, and how was she to know that her captain was a disreputable person
capable of taking part in, and giving effect to, a murder conspiracy? It was a ridiculous 
assumption. The plaintiff had failed on all points and judgment would be for the defendant, with
Charles Robert Carington, 3rd Baron Carrington and later Marquess of Lincolnshire
A man by the name of Eustace Clare Grenville Murray was, in August 1858, appointed as British 
Consul for the Black Sea ports, based in Odessa. Complaints about his behaviour became so
numerous that an inquiry was ordered by the Foreign Office. The inquiry found that he had
granted passports to non-British subjects, he had failed to levy fees that would have been
payable to the British government, and he was found guilty of such irregularities in the
solemnization of marriages to the extent that it was doubtful whether some of them were not
invalid, with any children born out of those marriages being consequently illegitimate. As a result
of the inquiry, Murray was dismissed in May 1868.
In January 1869 a new newspaper, the Queen's Messenger, appeared and soon displayed a
remarkable hostility towards the Foreign Office. In its issue of 17 June 1869, the paper 
contained a sketch portrait of "Bob Coachington, Lord Jarvey." This was a thinly disguised
attack on Lord Carrington and his family, and Carrington sought to find the identity of the
perpetrator. Having received information which convinced him that Murray was responsible
for whatever appeared in the Queen's Messenger, Lord Carrington sought and found Murray
on the steps of the Conservative Club, and there attempted to physically assault him, but it
seems that all Carrington succeeded in doing was damaging Murray's hat. Carrington also
informed Murray that "I am Lord Carrington and you know where to find me."
Murray pressed charges against Lord Carrington, who was summoned before the Marlborough
Street Police Court in July 1869 to answer two charges - one of assault, and the other "for
maliciously, unlawfully, wilfully, and wickedly uttering in the hearing of the plaintiff certain
provoking, malicious, and scandalous words, with intent to instigate, incite, and provoke him
[Murray] to fight a duel with him [Carrington]."
At the end of the hearing, after Carrington had been sent for trial, there occurred a remarkable
riot in the court, which was reported in the [Cardiff] 'Western Mail' as follows:-
'The assault upon Mr. Grenville Murray at the Conservative Club by Lord Carington [sic] was
enquired into on Wednesday, at the Marlborough-street Police-court………..The following is a
description of the "scene" which took place in the court at the close of the case. One of the
many persons accompanying or in attendance upon Lord Carington - who, by the way, though
a very youthful-looking peer, is physically much more than a match for the complainant - was
an elderly man, with a japanned tin deed box. This was ultimately the cause of a scene the 
like of which the magistrate said he had never before witnessed in a court of law. The excite-
ment of the case proper was heightened by the incidental allegation that certain papers 
produced had been literally stolen for the purposes of the defence. As the hearing went on,
the gentleman with the box - who turned out to be Mr. Newman, a solicitor, and who clasped
the big box with both arms throughout the whole time - kept on supplying Lord Carington's
counsel and solicitors with bundles of manuscript, evidently Queen's Messenger "copy," duly
labelled as to the dates, etc. After the magistrate had given his decision a rush was made at
the box, just as Mr. Newman was returning some of the papers. Cries of "Police," "Murder,"
and "Help" arose. Twenty or thirty men, old and young, clustered around the box, shouting at
the top of their voices, and struggling, kicking, and fighting for the prize. Chairs were hurled
out of the way, forms overturned, inkstands capsized. The attacking party was at first
successful, and the box began to approach the edge of the table. The defenders then waxed 
frantic, and created terrible din and confusion. Young gentlemen, who had watched the case
in lavender kids [gloves] and with unruffled mien, now threw themselves into the melee, and
blows, with both fist and stick, were freely exchanged all round. Half-a-dozen police at length
hurried in from the outside, and the day was speedily decided against the attackers. The box
was safe and sound, but some papers were torn to shreds in the scuffle. The "row" did not
by any means terminate when this issue was decided. The battle was renewed, apparently to
enable the combatants to settle any outstanding accounts, and the fun to the score of 
spectators who had invaded the magistrate's enclosure, to be out of harm's way and to 
witness the action was largely added to by the behaviour of half-a-dozen gentlemen who,
keeping safely out of the thick of the fight, leaped about from chair to chair screaming
gratuitous advice to everybody. This scene lasted ten minutes, and when it was at an end
broken furniture, torn coats, and battered hats told of the varying fortunes of the combatants.
Lord Carington, who had taken an active share in the strife, was then seen patting various 
policemen on the back, and congratulating them and his friends generally upon the upshot of
the little incident. Several persons were taken into custody and promptly hustled out of the
court by the police while the affray was going on, some of them, as was said, without at all
deserving the vigorous treatment they met with. The most remarkable point of the whole affair
was its impracticability, for apart from the chances of rescue, the size of the box, and the 
narrow guarded entrances of the court would have rendered it impossible for any one to get
off with it. The worthy magistrate had calmly surveyed this extraordinary contempt of court
from his chair. The Duke of Beaufort, the Marquis of Worcester, the Marquis of Lansdowne,
Lord Colville, the Marquis Townshend, Marquis of Blandford, Lord Clonmel, Lord George Lennox,
Lord Bingham, and other persons of distinction were present.'
At his subsequent trial on 23 July 1869, Lord Carrington was found guilty of assault, while the
charge of inciting a duel was dropped. Carrington was bound over to keep the peace and fined
In the meantime, however, Carrington had caused Murray to be charged with perjury, accusing
Murray of lying on oath when Murray stated that he had no connection with the Queen's
Messenger, or that he had written the defending article. At Murray's subsequent trial, it was
proved that the registered proprietor of the Queen's Messenger was Murray's son, and that the
draft of the offending article was in Murray's handwriting. Before his trial could be completed,
however, Murray fled to the Continent, where he remained in exile for the remainder of his life
before dying in Paris in December 1881.
The special remainder to the Barony of Carteret created in 1784
From the "London Gazette" of 27 January 1784 (issue 12514, page 3):-
'The King has been pleased to grant to the Right Honourable Henry Frederick Carteret, and the
Heirs Male of His Body lawfully begotten, the Dignity of a Baron of the Kingdom of Great Britain,
by the Name, Stile and Title of Baron Carteret, of Hawnes, in the County of Bedford, with 
Remainders to the Honourable George Thynne, Second Son, the Honourable John Thynne, Third
Son and the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and every other Son and Sons severally and success-
ively, of the Right Honourable Thomas Lord Viscount Weymouth, and the respective Heirs Male
of their Bodies lawfully begotten.'
Gilbert Kennedy, 4th Earl of Cassillis
The 4th Earl of Cassillis is remembered in Scottish history for his abduction and torture of Allan
Stewart, Commendator of the Cluniac Abbey at Crossraguel, in Carrick [the modern South
Ayrshire] in Scotland. The Earl wished to appropriate some of the lands, together with the 
income arising therefrom, surrounding the Abbey. In order to achieve this, he tricked Stewart 
into accompanying him to Dunure Castle, the home of the Kennedy family, where he was 
tortured by being roasted over a brazier in the 'Black Vault' of the castle. Eventually, Stewart
submitted to the Earl's demands and signed the lands in question over to the Earl. He was finally
rescued by the intervention of his brother-in-law, but his feet had been so burnt that he was
never able to walk again.
A good summary of Allan Stewart's ordeal is included in the Wikipedia article on "Dunure Castle."
After his rescue, Stewart made a complaint to the Privy Council of Scotland. The following is
taken from 'The North British Review' of February 1845. I have retained the original spelling,
adding explanations where necessary:-
'The manuscript records of the [Scottish] Privy Council, of 20th June, 1571, bear, that he [Allan
Stewart] presented a complaint against Gilbert Earl of Cassilis, Thomas Master of Cassilis, his
brother, "and their complices," to the effect, that "being on 30th August 1570, within the wood
of Corsraguell, doing my lawful errands and business, believing noe harm nor invasion to have
bein done to me by ainie persons," nevertheless the said Earl and sixteen others "came to me,
and ther persuaded me, be their flatterie and deceitfull words, to pass with him to his castle,
and he putting me within the same, that I should be in such firmance, commanded six of his
servants to wait upon me, so that I escaped not, and took from me my hors and all my 
weapons, and then depairted, until the 1st September thereafter, when he came again, and
required me to subscribe to him, ane feu-charter [a document establishing a form of land 
tenure] made in parchment, of the baill lands pertaining to the abbacie; togidder with ain
nineteen and five years talk of the teynds, which I niver read one word of, and answered that
it was a thing most unreasonable, and I could noway." The Earl, however, "after long boasting
and menacing of me, caused me to be caryed to ane houss, callit the Black Vault of Denbie,
wher the tormentors denuded me of all my claiths perforce, except onlie my sark [shirt] and
doublet [jacket], and they band baith my hands at the shackle bane, with ane cord, as they 
did baith my feet; and band my soalls betwixt ane iron chimney and a fire; and being bound
soe thairto, I could noway steir or move: whilk [which] being done, they set the same chimney
upoe a great fire, whilk was ther readie prepaired for my tormenting, so that I micht not steir,
but had almost inluked through my cruell burning." This regimen proved effectual. "Seeing noe
other appearance to me, but aither to condescend to his desyr, or else to continue in that
torment, I said I would obey to his desyr; howbeit it was soir against my will." He then signed
the deeds. "Whilk being done, the said Earle caused the said tormentors of me, to swear upon
the Bible, niver to reveal a word of this my unmerciful hand-dealing." This was not enough. The
Earl afterwards "requyred me to ratifie and approve the same, befor a notar and witnesses,
whilk I utterly refused, and thairfoir he as off befoir, band and putt me to the same manner of
tormenting; and being in soe grait pain, as I trust nevir man was in the like with his life's self,
when I cryed 'Fye upon me, will ye no ding whingers [daggers] in me, and putt me out of
this world, or else putt ore barrell of powder under me, rayther than to be demayned and
tormented in this unmercifull maner.' The said Earl hearing ane cry, baidd his servant putt ane
stopper in my throat, whilk be obeyed." But the tortured wretch had firmness not to yield. He
goes on to narrate, that "their seeing I was in danger of my life, my flesh consumed, and brunt
to the bane, and that I would not condescend to his purposs, I was relieved. Further, the said
Earl, without any title of right, has taiken up my haill leving at Crossraguel, taking noe fear of
our Sovereign Lordis letters, or chairgis usit in his name, even as he wer ane eximed persone,
not subject to the lawes, but might doe all things at his pleasure."
Notwithstanding Stewart's complaint to the Privy Council, it appears that little action was taken
against the Earl following this incident.
The special remainder to the Barony of Castle Coote created in 1800
From the "London Gazette" of 2 August 1800 (issue 15281, page 889):-
'His Majesty hath been pleased to grant the following Dignities, and Letters Patent are preparing
to be passed under the Great Seal of this Kingdom accordingly, Charles Henry Earl of 
Mountrath, the Dignity of Baron of Castle Coote, in the County of Roscommon, and the Heirs 
Male of his Body; and in Default of such Issue, to Charles Henry Coote, Esq; of Forest Lodge,
in the Queen's County and to his Heirs Male.'
Mervyn Tuchet, 12th Baron Audley and 2nd Earl of Castlehaven
Before 1617, Tuchet had married Elizabeth Barnham, who died young, but not before producing
six children. Elizabeth's sister Alice was the wife of Sir Francis Bacon. Tuchet's second wife was
Lady Ann Stanley, daughter of Ferdinando Stanley, 5th Earl of Derby. Ann, a famous beauty,
had previously been married to Grey Bridges, 5th Baron Chandos. Five children were born from
this marriage, including Elizabeth Brydges, of whom more later.
According to the will of Henry VIII and the Succession to the Crown Act of 1543, commonly 
known as the Third Succession Act, Ann was heir presumptive to the throne of England upon 
the death of Elizabeth I in 1603. For a detailed discussion of this subject, the reader is referred 
to a website compiled by William Addams Reitwiesner to be found at -
Notwithstanding Ann's claim to the throne, on the death of Elizabeth I, she was passed over in 
favour of King James VI of Scotland, who became James I of England. James was the senior 
male descendant of Margaret Tudor, older sister of Henry VIII.
Whatever the merits of Ann's claim, she married Mervyn Tuchet, 2nd Earl of Castlehaven on 
22 July 1624. On their wedding night, Lady Ann was surprised when Castlehaven's manservant,
Anthill, appeared suddenly at the bedside. In Ann's words, "Anthill came to our bed, and the 
Lord Audley talked lasciviously to me and told me that my body was his and that if I lay with 
any man with his consent 'twas not my fault but his."
To add variety to these arrangements, other servants were encouraged to take part. Skipwith,
a groom, "came naked into our chamber," said Lady Ann, "and to our bed." Lord Audley invited
his wife to decide which, between him and Skipwith, was the better endowed. "He took
delight in calling up his servants to show their nudities and forced me to look upon them and
commend those that had the longest."
If Lady Ann demurred, force was employed. When Giles Broadway (or Browning), the butler, 
came to her bed, Lord Audley held her firmly by the hands and feet. "He delighted to see the 
act done, and made Broadway lie with me in such a way that he might see it, and though I 
cried out, he never regarded the complaint I made but encouraged the ravisher."
At Lord Audley's subsequent trial, Broadway told the court that, after he had taken Lady Ann,
he was in turn sodomized by his lordship, as was Fitzpatrick, a cook. The court was then told 
that Lady Ann was not the only ill-treated woman in the family. Lady Ann's daughter, Elizabeth,
testified that she had been forced to submit to Skipwith, the groom. "He used oyl to enter my
body first for I was then but twelve years old and he usually lay with me by the Baron's
privity and command." Elizabeth was later forced to marry Skipwith.
It was Lord Audley's son, James, who eventually informed on his father, due to his fear that his
father intended to disinherit him. Charged with a capital offence before a jury of his peers, 
Audley admitted that a servant might occasionally have shared his bed, but only because of
the shortage of rooms in his various houses. The court declined to accept this defence and
Audley was attainted of felony, sentenced to death and beheaded on Tower Hill on 14 May 
1631. Broadway and Fitzpatrick were also executed.
There seems to be little doubt that Audley's death was brought about by Lady Ann's
manipulations. Fitzpatrick testified that she was "the wickedest woman in the world, and had
more to answer for than any woman that lived."  For further reading on this case, the reader is
referred to "A House in Gross Disorder; Sex, Law and the 2nd Earl of Castlehaven" by Cynthia B.
Herrup (Oxford University Press, 1999). Herrup also makes it clear that Lady Ann was the equal 
of her husband in immorality.
After Audley's death, Elizabeth, having got rid of Skipwith, married James, Audley's heir and
nemesis. Because he had been attainted, his English peerage, being descendible to heirs
general, was forfeited, but the Irish Earldom and Barony, being in tail, were not affected. This
was because the peerages in tail were protected by the statute 'De Donis Conditionalibus'
contained in the second Statute of Westminster (1285) which preserved all entailed honours 
against forfeiture for felony. A similar situation arose in 1760 when Earl Ferrers was executed
without any effect upon the descent of his peerages.
The following edited account of Audley's trial is taken from "A Critical Review of the State
Trials" [London 1735]:-
'The Trial of Mervin Lord Audley, Earl of Castlehaven, for a Rape and Sodomy, before the Lord
Keeper Coventry, Lord High Steward, and the rest of the Peers commissioned to try him, 25
April 1631. 7 Car. I.
'Three Indictments had been found against this Lord by the Grand Jury at the preceding Lent
Assizes for Wiltshire. The first for a Rape of his own Wife, whom he held by Force, while one of
his Servants lay with her: And the other two Indictments were for Buggery with a Man.
Before the Trial, the Judges came to the following Resolutions, on certain Queries, sent them
by the Lord High Steward:
1. That a Peer could not be tried by a common Jury, but must be tried by his Peers.
2. That a Peer could not challenge any of his Peers.
3. That a Peer could not have Counsel, but on Points of Law.
4. That his own Examinations taken without Oath, might be read against him; but the
    Examinations of others must be upon Oath.
5. That the Wife, in case of a Rape, being the Party wronged, may be Evidence against her 
6. That where one stood mute in a Rape he might have his Clergy; but not in Buggery.
7. That to denominate the Offence a Rape, there must be Penetration.
8. That the Lords Triers might eat and drink before they agreed; but could not separate, or
    adjourn, till they gave their Verdict.
9. That a Peer could not be convicted by less than twelve Peers.
10. That if a Prisoner stood mute in an Appeal, he must be hanged; for that it was an Attainder.
11. That a Peer standing mute in an Indictment, might be pressed to Death.
12. That the Lord High Steward, after a Verdict, might take Time to advise upon a Point of Law;
     and his Office continued until Judgment given.
'It was resolved also, That if a Woman was a Whore, she might however be ravished: But it was
a good Plea for the Man, that she was his Concubine. And that, if a Man took a Maid by Force, 
and ravished her, and she afterwards gave her Consent, and married him, this would not purge
the Offence, but it was still a Rape.
'The said several Indictments being certified, and brought into Court, and the Prisoner 
commanded to the Bar, the Evidence was produced: And first, the Examination of the Lady
Audley, as to the Rape, who deposed, that her Lord (the Prisoner) called his servant
Brodway, into his Bed while she was asleep: That she waked, and made all the Resistance she
could; but his Lordship held both her Hands, and one of her Legs, till Brodway lay with her:
That, as soon as she got from him, she would have killed herself with a Knife, and that Brodway
forced it from her. Brodway's Examination also was read, who confessed, that his Lordship called
him into his Bed, and bid him lie with his Lady; and, that he did lie with her, whilst his Lord held
one of her Legs and both her hands.
'As to the Sodomy, Brodway deposed, That the Earl used his Body as the Body of a Woman;
but never pierced it, only emitted between his Thighs.
'Fitz-Patrick, another Servant, deposed, That his Lord had twice committed Sodomy with him
(the Deponent); That Henry Skipwith, another Servant, had lain with the Lady Audley, by his
Lord's Command, and in his Presence: But the Lady, in her Examination, says, she cried out, and
that Skipwith did not lie with her.
'The Lady Audley also deposed, That the first or second Night after she was married, her Lord
called Ampthill (who had been his Page, and to whom he had married his Daughter) to his 
Bedside, and said, Now her body was his, and, if she loved him, she must love Ampthill: That
he made Skipwith come naked into his Chamber; and delighted to call in his Men-servants, and
shew her their Nudities, recommending the largest to her.
'Skipwith also deposed, That his Lord made him lie with the young Lady Audley, his Son's Wife,
who was then but twelve Years of Age: That he could not enter her at first, and the Lord Audley
fetched Oil to open her Body, but she cried out, and he could not enter her yet; then his Lord
ordered Oil to be brought a second Time, and the Deponent entered her.
'The young Lady also deposed, That the Lord Audley saw Skipwith lie with her several Times;
and, that nine Servants of the Family also had seen it: That she had no other Maintenance
than what she had from Skipwith; and that, among other Arguments the Prisoner used to make
her lie with Skipwith, he told her her Husband did not love her; and threatened to turn her out
of Doors, if she would not: Adding, that he would tell her Husband she did, if she did not; and
confirmed the Circumstance, of their using Oil to penetrate her Body.
'Fitz-Patrick also deposed, That his Lordship kept a Whore in the House; and, that he made four
or five of his Servants lie with her in his Presence; and his Lordship lay with her in their Sight.
'The Judges' Opinion being demanded on some Parts of the Evidence, resolved, That it was
Buggery within the Statute, where the Body is used so far as to emit thereon, without Penet-
ration: And so, where there was an Emission upon a Woman's Belly, it ought to be adjudged a
Rape: And that in a Rape a Woman is not limited to any Time to make her Complaint, if the 
Process be by Indictment; but in an Appeal she is.
'The Lord Audley, in his Defence, said, That his Wife's Testimony ought not to be regarded,
since she had confessed her lying with Brodway. To which it was answered, he could not urge
that Fact in his Defence, since he had forced her to suffer it. Then he said, that his Wife and
his Servants were not competent Witnesses; and that they were put upon practicing against
him by his Son, who fought his Life: Adding, That his Wife had been false to his Bed, and had a
Child in his Absence; and then made Protestations of his Innocence. But Woe to that Man (he
said) whose Wife and Servants should be admitted Witnesses against him, and whose Son
conspired his Death! His Son was now come of Age, and wanted his Lands, and his Wife a 
young Husband, now he was grown old, and had therefore plotted his Destruction.
'The Lords Triers having been withdrawn some Time, returned, and were unanimous in their
Opinion, that the Prisoner was GUILTY of the Rape: But as to the Sodomy, eleven of his Peers
were of Opinion, that he was NOT GUILTY, and sixteen declared him GUILTY; which Difference
of Opinion seems to have arisen from the Evidence that Brodway gave, that the Lord emitted
between his Thighs, but never penetrated him.
'Judgment was afterwards passed upon the Prisoner, that he should be hanged: However he
obtained the Favour of being [be]headed; when he professed himself perfectly innocent of
the Crimes he was charged with.
'The Lord Audley's two Servants, Lawrence Fitz-Patrick and Giles Brodway, were brought to
their Trials, the first for Sodomy, and the other for a Rape, June 27, 1631; when Fitz-Patrick's
Confession was produced against him, as Evidence of his having committed Sodomy with his
Lord; and the Jury desired to be informed, if the Person who suffered the Buggery to be 
committed upon him, could be said to commit Buggery, as the Words of the Statute were. To
which the Lord Chief Justice answered, That every Accessory to a Felony, was a Felon in Law:
And the Prisoner voluntarily prostituting his Body, when he was not only of Understanding and
Years, to know the Heinousness of the Offence, but of Strength to resist his Lord, he was 
guilty of Buggery.
The Prisoner in his Defence insisted, That the Evidence he had given for the King, at his
Lord's Trial, ought not to be produced against him at a Trial for the same Fact: But the Court
answered, it might; and that it was sufficient to convict him: Whereupon the Jury found him
'At Brodway's Trial the Lady Audley appeared in Court, and gave the same Evidence of the
Prisoner's committing a Rape upon her, while her Husband held her, as she had done at her 
Lord's Trial: And the Court demanding, whether the Prisoner entered her Body, when he forced
her, she answered, He did; and she intended to have expressed as much at the Lord Audley's
Trial: And Brodway having confessed as much before, the Jury found him guilty; and they were
both [Broadway and Fitzpatrick] hanged, confessing the Facts at their Executions.'
Copyright © 2020