The Cuninghame is recognized

Scottish Heraldry
Ryan Shuflin
Posts: 506
Joined: 26 Jul 2012, 13:00
Location: Germany

The Cuninghame is recognized

Postby Ryan Shuflin » 20 Jan 2014, 23:35

One can read an interlocutor on the Lord Lyon's website, where he recognizes Sir John Christopher Foggo
Montgomery Cunninghame of
Kilmaurs, Baronet of Corsehill as chief of the names and arms of Cunninghame. Apparently, this resolves a long dispute, between two claimants. Additionally, if I understood it correctly this could be a precursor to the Earldom of Glencairn being claimed as well.
http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/files/Cuninghame%20of%20Corsehill,%20John%20Christopher%20Foggo%20Montgomery%20-%20Granting%20Arms%20and%20with%20NOTE%20-%20web%202.pdf

User avatar
Chas Charles-Dunne
Posts: 624
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 15:48
Location: England - TL 80102 93862
Contact:

Re: The Cuninghame is recognized

Postby Chas Charles-Dunne » 21 Jan 2014, 10:09

Ryan Shuflin wrote:One can read an interlocutor on the Lord Lyon's website, where he recognizes Sir John Christopher Foggo
Montgomery Cunninghame of
Kilmaurs, Baronet of Corsehill as chief of the names and arms of Cunninghame. Apparently, this resolves a long dispute, between two claimants. Additionally, if I understood it correctly this could be a precursor to the Earldom of Glencairn being claimed as well.
http://www.lyon-court.com/lordlyon/files/Cuninghame%20of%20Corsehill,%20John%20Christopher%20Foggo%20Montgomery%20-%20Granting%20Arms%20and%20with%20NOTE%20-%20web%202.pdf


As far as I understand, Sir John is an older man in not good health. His only children are two daughters. The Chiefship can, of course, be inherited by the eldest, but neither one could inherit the Earldom. As a widower, he would have to marry again and hope that he could produce another heir that was a boy.

If my understanding is correct, giving him the Earldom would amount to throwing it away, as it would die with him.
Regards
Chas
IAAH Fellow

Image

User avatar
Chris Green
Posts: 2756
Joined: 10 Jul 2012, 13:06
Location: Karlstad, Sweden

Re: The Cuninghame is recognized

Postby Chris Green » 21 Jan 2014, 10:59

It is conceivable that there will soon be enough pressure from the distaff side for the laws of England and Scotland to be changed to allow inheritance of all peerages by either male or female. I have already seen comment on moves in that direction in the case of Baronetcies. Now that the law of succession to the Throne has changed it would be hard to raise a valid argument against such a change.
Chris Green
IAAH President

Apohypaton

User avatar
Arthur Radburn
Posts: 807
Joined: 11 Jul 2012, 09:56
Location: South Africa
Contact:

Re: The Cuninghame is recognized

Postby Arthur Radburn » 21 Jan 2014, 13:23

Chris Green wrote:It is conceivable that there will soon be enough pressure from the distaff side for the laws of England and Scotland to be changed to allow inheritance of all peerages by either male or female. I have already seen comment on moves in that direction in the case of Baronetcies. Now that the law of succession to the Throne has changed it would be hard to raise a valid argument against such a change.

A private member's Bill which proposes gender-equal succession to hereditary titles, as well as courtesy titles for husbands or same-sex partmers of peeresses, baronetesses and dames, has been making its very slow way through the House of Lords for the past year or so.

The draft Bill, and the transcript of the debate last month, are accessible from here : http://services.parliament.uk/bills/201 ... itles.html . There are some interesting points concerning the differences between English and Scottish laws of inheritance, and on the legal nature of titles and coats of arms. One of the lords tried to have the Bill amended to include the inheritance of coats of arms, but he was defeated.

They don't seem very confident that the Bill will necome law - one lord, referred to as the "lord high executioner", said outright it doesn't have "a hope in hell" - and are rather treating the debate as a means of exploring issues.
Regards
Arthur Radburn
IAAH Vice-President : Heraldic Education

User avatar
Martin Goldstraw
Site Admin
Posts: 1106
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 17:27
Location: Shropshire, England.
Contact:

Re: The Cuninghame is recognized

Postby Martin Goldstraw » 21 Jan 2014, 16:06

Setting aside the present ludicrous attempt to alter the succession of various titles which is ill thought out and poorly drafted, a great many Scottish peerage titles are absent any clear direction as to remainder and do not actually rely on the doctrine of male primogeniture anyway; Glencairn is no exception. Abeyance is peculiar to England and has never obtained in Scotland where, in default of male heirs, a peerage not limited in descent to the male line passes at once to the elder or eldest daughter or nearest female heir. The Glencairn title though is fraught with difficulty . When it became dormant (which if a true Scottish earldom it ought not have done), it ought to have been accepted that Lady Henriet Don, sister of the last earl was (under the strict terms of a Scottish Peerage) actually next in line however she doesn’t seem to have been given due regard in the petition to the Committee for Priveledges when the earldom was claimed by Sir Adam Fergusson of Kilkerran, Bt., as heir of line of Alexander 10th, Earl of Glencairn and was opposed by Sir Walter Montgomery Cunningham of Corshill, Bt., as presumed heir male. The House of Lords Committee of Privileges on 14 July 1797, chaired by the Lord Chancellor (Lord Rosslyn),decided against all the claimants, and adjudged, that while Sir Adam Fergusson had shown himself to be the heir-general of Alexander, 10th Earl of Glencairn who died in 1670, he had not made out his right to the title. The decision was severely criticised by the jurist John Riddell in the 19th century and by Sir Iain Moncreiffe of that Ilk in the 20th.
Martin Goldstraw
Cheshire Heraldry
http://cheshire-heraldry.org.uk


Return to “Court of the Lord Lyon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests