ii s. VIIL AUG. 9, 1913.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
113
1272. Thomas, Earl of Lancaster,
Leicester, and Derby, having married
Alice, only daughter and heir of Earl Henry
de Lacy; beheaded 1322.
1322. Alice, widow of the last Earl, restored to her ancestral dignity of Countess of Lincoln nine months after her husband's death; died 1348.
1349. Henry, Earl of Lancaster and Derby, nephew and heir to Earl Thomas; created Earl of Lincoln, 20 August, 1349 ; created Duke of Lancaster, 1351 ; died 1361.
1362. John of Ghent, Earl of Richmond, fourth son of King Edward III., having married Blanche, daughter and heiress of Duke Henry, was created Duke of Lan- caster, and also used among his other titles that of Earl of Lincoln ; died 1399. His son, Henry of Bolingbroke probably the only English king that Lincolnshire can boast as its native Earl of Derby, in that year became King by the title of Henry IV., and thus the representation of the ancient Earldom of Lincoln at last merged in the Crown as parcel of the Duchy of Lancaster.
The title of Earl of Lincoln was not, how- ever, distinctly revived until 1467, when King Edward IV. conferred it on his nephew, John de la Pole, son and heir-apparent of the Duke of Suffolk, who died twenty years later without issue.
In 1525 King Henry VIII. bestowed the dignity of Earl of Lincoln on his sister's son, Henry Brandon, son and heir-apparent of Charles, Duke of Suffolk, but it was only a short-lived title, for this Earl died in child- hood.
Lastly, the Earldom of Lincoln was con- ferred in 1572 by Queen Elizabeth on her aged Lord High Admiral, Edward, Lord Clinton, in whose family it has descended to the present Duke of Newcastle.
Vide 'The Descent of the Earldom of Lincoln,' by John Gough Nichols, Esq., F.S.A., in ' Memoirs of the History and Antiquities of the County and City of Lin- coln,' MDCCCL. J. C. R.
The operative words in the patent of 1572 (Pat, Roll No. 1090, m. 1 and 2) are as follows : "ad statum honorem et dignitatem comitis Lincoln."
t believe that in every similar instance the earldom is that of the county, and not of the town. Even in the case of that of Shrewsbury, it is only the English trans- lation that causes the difference, for the title in Latin is " nomen et honorem comitis Salop." E. A. FRY.
Kenley, Surrey.
The earldom of 1572 was very much
comitatus. Three years later the Mayor
of Boston complained of certain robbers
or " Pyrates " frequenting the " Coastes
of Lincolnshyer," and asked the Privy
Council what was to be done with
four of them who had been apprehended
in accordance with " the Queenes Ma tiea
p'clamacon anno ij." The Council referred
them to " the Lord Clynton, that is Vice-
Admiral in those partes " ; and his lordship
thereupon desired his " very lovinge Trends-
Mr. Maior and the Justices of the borrowe
of Boston " to transfer them to his custody
at Tattershall Castle.
MB. WHITE has overlooked the curious case of the Dukedom of Devonshire created (as an earldom) in 1618, during the abeyance (1566-1831) of the Earldom of Devon, which still exists. W. E. B.
[MR. CHARLES LANSDOWN also thanked for reply.]
DANVERS FAMILY OF SWITHLAND
LONDON (11 S. viii. 48). Sir John Danvers
of Swithland, second baronet, succeeded his
father in 1753, when about 30 years of age,
and died in 1796, aged 73. It is therefore
quite probable that he would be the tenant
of a house in Surrey Street, Strand, in 1743-
1767, and of 11, Hanover Square in 1790-96.
No other baronet of those names flourished
during that period. W. D. PINK.
The Sir John Danvers of 1743 cannot be the same as Sir John Danvers of Swithland, as the latter did not succeed to the baronetcy until 1753 (G. E. C., ' Complete Baronetage,' v. 90). He was probably Sir John Danvers of Culworth, who succeeded in 1712 (G. E. C. t ii. 209). The only difficulty is that the owner of the house in Surrey Street is said to appear in the Rate- Books until 1767, whereas this Sir John Danvers died in 1744. As, however, G. E. C. gives no other baronet of this name, it may be suggested that the house continued in the ownership of the family, and no one thought it worth while to have the Rate-Book corrected.
F. W. READ.
After 1744 there was only one Sir John Danvers, Bart., namely, the one of Swith- land, who succeeded his father, Sir Joseph, as second baronet in 1753, and died in 1796, when that baronetcy became extinct. There was no Sir John Danvers baronet from 1744, when Sir John Danvers, third baronet of Culworth, died, till 1753, his two sons, who succeeded him in the baronetcy, being Sir Henry, who was baronet from 1744 to 1753, and Sir Michael, who was baronet
