PEERAGE
Last updated 31/08/2010
Date Rank Order Name Born Died  Age
LOREBURN
4 Jul 1911 E 1 Robert Threshie Reid 3 Apr 1846 30 Nov 1923
to     Created Baron Loreburn 8 Jan 1906
30 Nov 1923 and Earl Loreburn 4 Jul 1911
MP for Hereford 1880-1885 and Dumfries
1886-1905. Solicitor General 1894. Attorney
General 1894-1895. Lord Chancellor 
1905-1912.  PC 1905
Peerages extinct on his death
LORN
c 1439 B[S] 1 Robert Stewart c 1448
Created Lord Lorn c 1439
c 1448 2 John Stewart 20 Dec 1463
20 Dec 1463 3 Walter Stewart c 1488
c 1488 4 Thomas Stewart 9 Sep 1513
9 Sep 1513 5 Richard Stewart 1532
1532 6 John Stewart Jan 1570
Jan 1570 7 James Stewart 14 Feb 1586
14 Feb 1586 8 John Stewart,Earl of Athole 1603
1603 9 John Stewart,Earl of Athole 1626
to     On his death the peerage became either
1626 dormant or extinct
L'ORTI
6 Feb 1299 B 1 Henry de L'Orti 1322
Summoned to Parliament as Lord
L'Orti 6 Feb 1299
1322 2 Henry de L'Orti 1341
1341 3 John de L'Orti after 1341
to     On his death the peerage fell into abeyance
after 1341
LORTON
28 May 1806 V[I] 1 Robert Edward King 12 Aug 1773 20 Nov 1854 81
Created Baron Erris of Boyle 29 Dec 
1800 and Viscount Lorton 28 May 1806
Lord Lieutenant Roscommon 1831-1854
For further information on this peer, see the
note at the foot of the page containing details
of the Earldom of Kingston
20 Nov 1854 2 Robert King
He succeeded to the Earldom of Kingston 
(qv) in 1869 with which title this peerage
then merged
LOTHIAN
10 Jul 1606 E[S] 1 Mark Kerr 8 Apr 1609
Created Lord Newbottle 28 Oct 1587
and Earl of Lothian 10 Jul 1606
8 Apr 1609 2 Robert Kerr 15 Jul 1624
to     Peerage extinct on his death
15 Jul 1624
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
31 Oct 1631 E[S] 1 William Kerr c 1605 Oct 1675
Created Lord Newbottle and Earl of
Lothian 31 Oct 1631
Oct 1675 2 Robert Kerr 8 Mar 1636 15 Feb 1703 66
23 Jun 1701 M[S] 1 Created Lord Kerr of Newbottle,
Viscount of Briene,Earl of Ancram and
Marquess of Lothian 23 Jun 1701
15 Feb 1703 2 William Kerr 1661 28 Feb 1722 60
KT 1705
28 Feb 1722 3 William Kerr c 1690 28 Jul 1767
KT 1734
28 Jul 1767 4 William Henry Kerr 1710 12 Apr 1775 64
  MP for Richmond 1747-1763.  KT 1768
12 Apr 1775 5 William John Kerr 13 Mar 1737 4 Jan 1815 77
    KT 1776
4 Jan 1815 6 William Kerr 4 Oct 1763 27 Apr 1824 60
Created Baron Ker of Kersheugh
17 Apr 1821
Lord Lieutenant Midlothian 1819-1824 and
Roxburgh 1812-1824. KT 1820
27 Apr 1824 7 John William Robert Kerr 1 Feb 1794 14 Nov 1841 47
MP for Huntingdon 1820-1824. Lord
Lieutenant Roxburgh 1824-1841  PC 1841
14 Nov 1841 8 William Schomberg Robert Kerr 12 Aug 1832 4 Jul 1870 37
4 Jul 1870 9 Schomberg Henry Kerr 2 Dec 1833 17 Jan 1900 66
Secretary of State for Scotland 1887-1892
KT 1878  PC 1886
For information regarding the death of the 9th
Marquess's son,styled the Earl of Ancram,see the
note at the foot of this page
17 Jan 1900 10 Robert Schomberg Kerr 22 Mar 1874 16 Mar 1930 55
16 Mar 1930 11 Philip Henry Kerr 18 Apr 1882 12 Dec 1940 58
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster
1931. CH 1920  PC 1939  KT 1940
12 Dec 1940 12 Peter Francis Walter Kerr 8 Sep 1922 11 Oct 2004 82
11 Oct 2004 13 Michael Andrew Foster Jude Kerr 7 Jul 1945
MP for Berwick and East Lothian 1974, 
Edinburgh South 1979-1987 and Devizes 1992-
PC 1996
LOUDOUN
30 Jun 1601 B[S] 1 Hugh Campbell 15 Dec 1622
Created Lord Campbell of Loudoun
30 Jun 1601
15 Dec 1622 2 Margaret Campbell.
12 May 1633 E[S] 1 she married -
John Campbell 1598 15 Mar 1663 64
Created Lord Tarrinzean and Mauchline
and Earl of Loudoun 12 May 1633
15 Mar 1663 2 James Campbell 1684
1684 3 Hugh Campbell 20 Nov 1731
Secretary of State for Scotland 1705-1707
Lord Lieutenant Ayrshire. KT 1706  PC 1708
20 Nov 1731 4 John Campbell 5 May 1705 27 Apr 1782 76
27 Apr 1782 5 James Mure-Campbell 11 Feb 1726 28 Apr 1786 60
MP for Ayrshire 1754-1761.
28 Apr 1786 6 Flora Rawdon-Hastings Aug 1780 8 Jan 1840 59
For further information on this peeress and her
daughter,see the note at the foot of this page
8 Jan 1840 7 George Augustus Francis Rawdon-Hastings,
Marquess of Hastings 4 Feb 1808 13 Jan 1844 35
13 Jan 1844 8 Paulyn Reginald Serlo Rawdon-Hastings,
Marquess of Hastings 2 Jun 1833 17 Jan 1851 17
17 Jan 1851 9 Henry Weysford Charles Plantagenet
Rawdon-Hastings,Marquess of Hastings 22 Jul 1842 10 Nov 1868 26
10 Nov 1868 10 Edith Maud Abney-Hastings 10 Dec 1833 23 Jan 1874 40
23 Jan 1874 11 Charles Edward Rawdon-Hastings 5 Jan 1855 17 May 1920 65
17 May 1920 12 Edith Maud Abney-Hastings 13 May 1883 24 Feb 1960 76
24 Feb 1960 13 Barbara Huddleston Abney-Hastings 3 Jul 1919 1 Nov 2002 83
1 Nov 2002 14 Michael Edward Abney-Hastings 22 Jul 1942
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
13 Feb 1817 V 1 Francis Rawdon-Hastings 9 Dec 1754 28 Nov 1826 71
Created Baron Rawdon 5 Mar 1783, and
Viscount Loudoun,Earl of Rawdon and
Marquess of Hastings 13 Feb 1817
He was succeeded by the 7th Earl of
Loudoun (see above)
LOUGHBOROUGH
23 Oct 1643 B 1 Henry Hastings 28 Sep 1610 10 Jan 1667 55
to     Created Baron Loughborough
10 Jan 1667 23 Oct 1643
Lord Lieutenant Leicester 1661-1667
Peerage extinct on his death
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
17 Jun 1780 B 1 Alexander Wedderburn 13 Feb 1733 3 Jan 1805 71
to     Created Baron Loughborough 17 Jun
3 Jan 1805 1780 and 31 Oct 1795,and Earl of
31 Oct 1795 B 1 Rosslyn 21 Apr 1801
On his death the creation of 1780 became
extinct. See "Rosslyn"
LOUGHGUYRE
22 Apr 1718 B[I] 1 Charles Fane 30 Jan 1676 4 Jul 1744 68
Created Baron Loughguyre and 
Viscount Fane 33 Apr 1718
See "Fane"
LOUGHNEAGH
21 Nov 1660 B[I] 1 John Clotworthy 23 Sep 1665
Created Baron of Loughneagh and
Viscount Massereene 21 Nov 1660
See "Massereene"
LOUR
20 Apr 1639 B[S] 1 Sir John Carnegie c 1580 18 Jan 1667
Created Lord Lour 20 Apr 1639 and
Lord Lour and Egglismadie and Earl of
Ethie 1 Nov 1647
He exchanged the titles for the Earldom
of Northesk and Barony of Rosehill
in 1662 - see "Northesk"
LOUTH
12 May 1319 E[I] 1 John de Bermingham 10 Jun 1329
to     Created Earl of Louth 12 May 1319
10 Jun 1329 Peerage extinct on his death
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
15 Jun 1541 B[I] 1 Oliver Plunkett c 1555
Created Baron Louth 15 Jun 1541
c 1555 2 Thomas Plunkett c 1547 1 May 1571
1 May 1571 3 Patrick Plunkett 1548 1575 27
1575 4 Oliver Plunkett 5 Mar 1607
5 Mar 1607 5 Matthew Plunkett 19 Jul 1629
19 Jul 1629 6 Oliver Plunkett Mar 1608 c 1679
c 1679 7 Matthew Plunkett Sep 1689
Lord Lieutenant Louth and Drogheda
PC 1687
Sep 1689 8 Oliver Plunkett 1668 1707 39
1707 9 Matthew Plunkett 1698 20 Jun 1754 55
20 Jun 1754 10 Oliver Plunkett 2 Apr 1727 4 Mar 1763 35
4 Mar 1763 11 Thomas Oliver Plunkett 28 Aug 1757 25 Jun 1823 65
For further information on this peer, see the
note at the foot of this page
25 Jun 1823 12 Thomas Oliver Plunkett 5 Aug 1809 26 Jun 1849 39
26 Jun 1849 13 Randal Percy Otway Plunkett 28 Aug 1832 19 Jul 1883 50
19 Jul 1883 14 Randal Pulgrim Ralph Plunkett 24 Sep 1868 28 Oct 1941 73
28 Oct 1941 15 Otway Randal Percy Oliver Plunkett 26 Apr 1892 3 Feb 1950 57
3 Feb 1950 16 Otway Michael James Oliver Plunkett 19 Aug 1929
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
23 Apr 1759 E[I] 1 Thomas Bermingham,Baron Athenry 16 Nov 1717 11 Jan 1799 81
to     Created Earl of Louth 23 Apr 1759
11 Jan 1799 PC [I] 1755
Peerage extinct on his death
LOVAINE
28 Jan 1784 B 1 Hugh Percy,1st Duke of Northumberland c 1714 6 Jun 1786
      Created Baron Lovaine 28 Jan 1784
 
6 Jun 1786 2 Algernon Percy,later [1790] 1st Earl of Beverley 21 Jan 1750 21 Oct 1830 80
21 Oct 1830 3 George Percy,2nd Earl of Beverley 22 Jun 1778 21 Aug 1867 89
He succeeded to the Dukedom of
Northumberland in 1865 when the peerages
merged
                         ***********
22 Jul 1887 Henry George Percy 29 May 1846 14 May 1918 71
He was summoned to Parliament by a Writ of
Acceleration as Baron Lovaine 22 Jul 1887
He succeeded as Duke of Northumberland (qv)
in 1899
LOVAT
1458 B[S] 1 Hugh Fraser c 1500
Created Lord Lovat 1458
c 1500 2 Thomas Fraser 21 Oct 1524
21 Oct 1524 3 Hugh Fraser 2 Jun 1544
2 Jun 1544 4 Alexander Fraser 1558
1558 5 Hugh Fraser 1 Jan 1577
1 Jan 1577 6 Simon Fraser c 1572 3 Apr 1633
3 Apr 1633 7 Hugh Fraser 16 Feb 1646
16 Feb 1646 8 Hugh Fraser 2 May 1643 27 Apr 1672 28
27 Apr 1672 9 Hugh Fraser 28 Sep 1666 14 Sep 1696 29
14 Sep 1696 10 Thomas Fraser 1636 May 1699 62
May 1699 11 Simon Fraser c 1667 9 Apr 1747
to     He was attainted and the peerage forfeited
9 Apr 1747
28 Jan 1837 B 1 Thomas Alexander Fraser 17 Jun 1802 28 Jun 1875 73
13 Aug 1857 12 Created Baron Lovat 28 Jan 1837
He was restored to the Scottish peerage
in 1857.  KT 1865. Lord Lieutenant
Inverness 1853-1873
28 Jun 1875 13 Simon Fraser 21 Dec 1828 6 Sep 1887 58
Lord Lieutenant Inverness 1873-1887
For further information relating to a claim for this
peerage,see the note at the foot of this page
6 Sep 1887 14 Simon Joseph Fraser 25 Nov 1871 18 Feb 1933 61
KT 1915
18 Feb 1933 15 Simon Christopher Joseph Fraser 9 Jul 1911 16 Mar 1995 83
16 Mar 1995 16 Simon Fraser 13 Feb 1977
LOVEL
6 Feb 1299 B 1 John Lovel 1254 1311 57
Summoned to Parliament as Lord
Lovel 6 Feb 1299
1311 2 John Lovel 1289 1315 26
1315 3 John Lovel Nov 1347
Nov 1347 4 John Lovel 1340 Dec 1361 21
Dec 1361 5 John Lovel 1341 10 Sep 1408 67
KG 1405
10 Sep 1408 6 John Lovel 19 Oct 1414
19 Oct 1414 7 William Lovel 1397 13 Jun 1455 57
13 Jun 1455 8 John Lovel 1433 9 Jan 1465 31
9 Jan 1465 9 Francis Lovel 1456 16 Jun 1487 30
to     Created Viscount Lovel 4 Jan 1483
1485 KG 1483
He was attainted and the peerages 
forfeited
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
9 May 1744 E 1 Thomas Coke c 1695 20 Apr 1759
to     Created Baron Lovel 28 May 1728,and
20 Apr 1759 Viscount Coke and Earl of Leicester
9 May 1744
Peerages extinct on his death
LOVEL OF CASTLE CARY
20 Nov 1348 B 1 Richard Lovel 31 Jan 1351
to     Summoned to Parliament as Lord
31 Jan 1351 Lovel 20 Nov 1348
Peerage extinct on his death
LOVEL AND HOLLAND
7 May 1762 B 1 John Perceval,Earl of Egmont 25 Feb 1711 4 Dec 1770 59
Created Baron Lovell and Holland 
7 May 1762
See "Egmont"
LOVELACE
31 May 1627 B 1 Richard Lovelace c 1567 22 Apr 1634
Created Baron Lovelace 31 May 1627
MP for Berkshire 1601 and 1621-1622,
Abingdon 1604-1611 and Windsor 1614
22 Apr 1634 2 John Lovelace Feb 1616 25 Nov 1670 54
Lord Lieutenant Berkshire 1660-1670
25 Nov 1670 3 John Lovelace c 1640 27 Sep 1693
MP for Berkshire 1661-1670
27 Sep 1693 4 John Lovelace 6 May 1709
Governor of New York
6 May 1709 5 John Lovelace May 1709
May 1709 6 Nevill Lovelace 1708 28 Jul 1736 28
to     Peerage extinct on his death
28 Jul 1736
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
30 Jun 1838 E 1 William King-Noel 21 Feb 1805 29 Dec 1893 88
Created Viscount Ockham and Earl of
Lovelace 30 Jun 1838
Lord Lieutenant Surrey 1840-1893
29 Dec 1893 2 Ralph Gordon Noel King-Noel 2 Jul 1839 28 Aug 1906 67
28 Aug 1906 3 Lionel Fortescue King 16 Nov 1865 5 Oct 1929 63
5 Oct 1929 4 Peter Malcolm King 30 Mar 1905 4 Dec 1964 59
4 Dec 1964 5 Peter Axel William Locke King 26 Nov 1951
LOVELL-DAVIS
26 Jun 1974 B[L] 1 Peter Lovell-Davis 8 Jul 1924 6 Jan 2001 76
to     Created Baron Lovell-Davis 26 Jun 1974
6 Jan 2001 Peerage extinct on his death
LOW
16 Nov 1999 B[L] 1 Toby Austin Richard William Low,Baron 24 May 1914 7 Dec 2000 86
to     Aldington
7 Dec 2000 Created Baron Low 16 Nov 1999
Peerage extinct on his death
 
LOW OF DALSTON
13 Jun 2006 B[L] 1 Colin MacKenzie Low
Created Baron Low 13 Jun 2006
LOWRY
18 Jul 1979 B[L] 1 Robert Lynd Erskine Lowry 30 Jan 1919 15 Jan 1999 79
to     Created Baron Lowry 18 Jul 1979
15 Jan 1999 Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland
1971-1988. Lord of Appeal in Ordinary 
1988-1994. PC [ni] 1971.  PC 1974
Peerage extinct on his death
LOWTHER
28 May 1696 B 1 John Lowther 25 Apr 1655 10 Jul 1700 45
Created Baron Lowther and Viscount
Lonsdale 28 May 1696
See "Lonsdale"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
24 May 1784 V 1 James Lowther 5 Aug 1736 24 May 1802 65
26 Oct 1797 V 1 Created Baron Lowther,Baron of the 
  Barony of Kendal,Baron of the Barony
of Burgh,Viscount of Lonsdale,
Viscount of Lowther and Earl of 
Lonsdale 24 May 1784 and Baron and
Viscount Lowther 26 Oct 1797
On his death the Earldom and Viscountcy of
Lonsdale became extinct,while the Barony 
and Viscountcy of Lowther passed to -
24 May 1802 2 William Lowther 29 Dec 1757 19 Mar 1844 86
Created Earl of Lonsdale 7 Apr 1807
See "Lonsdale"
                      *****************
8 Sep 1841 William Lowther 30 Jul 1787 4 Mar 1872 84
He was summoned to Parliament by Writ of
Acceleration as Baron Lowther 8 Sep 1841
He succeeded as Earl of Lonsdale (qv) in 1844
LUCAN
1 Oct 1795 E[I] 1 Sir Charles Bingham,7th baronet 22 Sep 1735 29 Mar 1799 63
Created Baron Lucan 24 Jul 1776
and Earl of Lucan 1 Oct 1795
29 Mar 1799 2 Richard Bingham 4 Dec 1764 30 Jun 1839 74
MP for St.Albans 1790-1800
30 Jun 1839 3 George Charles Bingham 16 Apr 1800 10 Nov 1888 88
MP for Mayo 1826-1830. Lord Lieutenant
Mayo 1845-1888.  Field Marshal 1887
10 Nov 1888 4 George Bingham 8 May 1830 5 Jun 1914 84
MP for Mayo 1865-1874. Lord Lieutenant
Mayo 1901-1914. KP 1899
5 Jun 1914 5 George Charles Bingham 13 Dec 1860 20 Apr 1949 88
Created Baron Bingham 26 Jun 1934
MP for Chertsey 1904-1906.  PC 1938
20 Apr 1949 6 George Charles Patrick Bingham 24 Nov 1898 21 Jan 1964 65
21 Jan 1964 7 Richard John Bingham 18 Dec 1934
LUCAS OF CHILWORTH
27 Jun 1946 B 1 George William Lucas 29 Mar 1896 11 Oct 1967 71
Created Baron Lucas of Chilworth
27 Jun 1946
11 Oct 1967 2 Michael William George Lucas 26 Apr 1926 10 Nov 2001 75
10 Nov 2001 3 Simon William Lucas 6 Feb 1957
LUCAS OF CRUDWELL
7 May 1663 B 1 Mary Grey,Countess of Kent 1 Nov 1702
Created Baroness Lucas of Crudwell
7 May 1663
1 Nov 1702 2 Henry Grey,Duke of Kent 28 Sep 1671 5 Jun 1740 68
8 Nov 1718 3 Anthony Grey 1696 21 Jul 1723 27
Summoned to Parliament as Lord
Lucas of Crudwell 8 Nov 1718
He was the son and heir apparent of the 1st Duke
of Kent, but died before he could succeed to
that title
21 Jul 1723 4 Jemima Yorke 9 Oct 1722 10 Jan 1797 74
10 Jan 1797 5 Anabel Hume-Campbell,Countess de Grey 22 Jan 1751 4 May 1833 82
4 May 1833 6 Thomas Philip de Grey,Earl de Grey 8 Dec 1781 14 Nov 1859 77
14 Nov 1859 7 Anne Florence Cowper,Countess Cowper 8 Jun 1806 23 Jul 1880 74
23 Jul 1880 8 Francis Thomas de Grey Cowper,Earl
Cowper 11 Jun 1834 18 Jul 1905 71
18 Jul 1905 9 Auberon Thomas Herbert 25 May 1876 3 Nov 1916 40
President of the Board of Agriculture
and Fisheries 1914-1915.  PC 1912
3 Nov 1916 10 Nan Ino Cooper 13 Jun 1880 23 Nov 1958 78
23 Nov 1958 11 Anne Rosemary Palmer 28 Apr 1919 31 Dec 1991 72
31 Dec 1991 12 Ralph Matthew Palmer 7 Jun 1951
LUCAS OF SHENFIELD
3 Jan 1645 B 1 John Lucas 23 Oct 1606 2 Jul 1671 64
Created Baron Lucas of Shenfield
3 Jan 1645
2 Jul 1671 2 Charles Lucas 28 Nov 1688
28 Nov 1688 3 Robert Lucas c 1649 31 Jan 1705
to     Peerage extinct on his death
31 Jan 1705
LUCE
2 Oct 2000 B[L] 1 Sir Richard Napier Luce 14 Oct 1936
Created Baron Luce for life 2 Oct 2000
MP for Arundel and Shoreham 1971-1974 and
Shoreham 1974-1992. Governor of Gibraltar
1997-2000.   PC 1986  KG 2008
LUCY
15 May 1320 B 1 Anthony de Lucy 1283 c 1342
Summoned to Parliament as Lord
Lucy 15 May 1320
c 1342 2 Thomas de Lucy 5 Dec 1365
5 Dec 1365 3 Anthony de Lucy 1341 Sep 1368 27
Sep 1368 4 Joan de Lucy Jun 1366 1 Oct 1369 3
1 Oct 1369 5 Maud de Umfravill,Countess of Angus 24 Dec 1398
to     On her death the peerage became dormant
24 Dec 1398
LUDFORD
30 Sep 1997 B[L] 1 Sarah Ann Ludford 14 Mar 1951
Created Baroness Ludford for life
30 Sep 1997
LUDLOW
27 May 1748 V 1 Henry Arthur Herbert c 1703 10 Sep1772
Created Baron Herbert of Chirbury
21 Dec 1743,Baron Powis,Viscount
Ludlow and Earl of Powis 27 May 1748
and Baron Herbert of Chirbury
16 Oct 1749
See "Powis"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
3 Oct 1760 E[I] 1 Peter Ludlow 21 Apr 1730 26 Oct 1803 73
Created Baron Ludlow 19 Dec 1755
and Viscount Preston and Earl 
Ludlow 3 Oct 1760
MP for Huntingdonshire 1768-1796  PC 1782
26 Oct 1803 2 Augustus Ludlow 1 Jan 1755 7 Nov 1811 56
7 Nov 1811 3 George James Ludlow 12 Dec 1758 16 Apr 1842 83
10 Sep 1831 B 1 Created Baron Ludlow 10 Sep 1831
to     Peerages extinct on his death
16 Apr 1842
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
26 Jul 1897 B 1 Henry Charles Lopes 3 Oct 1828 25 Dec 1899 71
Created Baron Ludlow 26 Jul 1897
MP for Launceston 1868-1874 and Frome
1874-1876. Lord Justice of Appeal 1885-
1897.  PC 1885
25 Dec 1899 2 Henry Ludlow Lopes 30 Sep 1865 8 Nov 1922 57
to     Peerage extinct on his death
8 Nov 1922
LUGARD
16 Mar 1928 B 1 Frederick John Dealtry Lugard 22 Jan 1858 11 Apr 1945 87
to     Created Baron Lugard 16 Mar 1928
11 Apr 1945 Governor of Hong Kong 1907-1912 and
Nigeria 1912-1914. Governor General of
Nigeria 1914-1919.  PC 1920
Peerage extinct on his death
LUGTOUN
29 May 1680 V[S] 1 John Leslie,Earl of Rothes 1630 27 Jul 1681 51
to     Created Lord Auchmoutie and 
27 Jul 1681 Caskieberry,Viscount of Lugtoun,Earl
of Leslie,Marquess of Ballinbrieich
and Duke of Rothes
Peerage extinct on his death
LUKE
9 Jul 1929 B 1 George Lawson-Johnston 9 Sep 1873 23 Feb 1943 69
Created Baron Luke 9 Jul 1929
Lord Lieutenant Bedfordshire 1936-1943
23 Feb 1943 2 Ian St.John Lawson-Johnston 7 Jun 1905 25 May 1996 90
25 May 1996 3 Arthur Charles St.John Lawson-Johnston 13 Jan 1933
LUMLEY
28 Sep 1384 B 1 Ralph de Lumley 1362 5 Jan 1400 37
to     Summoned to Parliament as Lord
5 Jan 1400 Lumley 28 Sep 1384
He was attainted and the peerage forfeited
28 Jul 1461 2 Thomas de Lumley 29 Sep 1408 c 1480
He obtained a reversal of the attainder
in 1461
c 1480 3 George de Lumley 13 Nov 1508
13 Nov 1508 4 Richard de Lumley 26 May 1510
26 May 1510 5 John de Lumley 1492 1544 52
to     On his death the peerage passed to his son
1544 George who had however been previously
attainted. Thus the peerage was forfeited
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
1547 B 1 John Lumley c 1533 11 Apr 1609
to     Created Baron Lumley 1547
11 Apr 1609 Peerage extinct on his death
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
12 Jul 1628 V[I] 1 Richard Lumley 7 Apr 1589 1663 74
Created Viscount Lumley 12 Jul 1628
1663 2 Richard Lumley
31 May 1681 B 1 Created Baron Lumley 31 May 1681
10 Apr 1689 V 1 and Viscount Lumley 10 Apr 1689
He was subsequently created Earl of 
Scarbrough (qv) in 1690 with which title
these peerages then merged
                     ***************
4 Mar 1715 Richard Lumley 30 Nov 1686 29 Jan 1740 53
He was summoned to Parliament by a Writ of
Acceleration as Baron Lumley 4 Mar 1715
He succeeded as Earl of Scarbrough (qv) in 1721
LUNDIE
28 Mar 1642 B[S] 1 James Campbell c 1610 1645
to     Created Lord Kintyre 12 Feb 1626 and
1645 Lord Lundie and Earl of Irvine
28 Mar 1642
Peerages extinct on his death
LURGAN
14 May 1839 B 1 Charles Brownlow 17 Apr 1795 30 Apr 1847 52
Created Baron Lurgan 14 May 1839
MP for Armagh 1818-1832. PC [I] 1837
30 Apr 1847 2 Charles Brownlow 10 Apr 1831 16 Jan 1882 50
KP 1864. Lord Lieutenant Armagh 1864-1882
16 Jan 1882 3 William Brownlow 11 Jan 1858 3 Feb 1937 79
3 Feb 1937 4 William George Edward Brownlow 22 Feb 1902 30 Jan 1984 81
30 Jan 1984 5 John Desmond Cavendish Brownlow 29 Jun 1911 17 Sep 1991 80
to     Peerage extinct on his death
17 Sep 1991
LUTTRELL
24 Jun 1295 B 1 Robert Luttrell 1297
to     Summoned to Parliament as Lord
1297 Luttrell 24 Jun 1295
Peerage extinct on his death
LUXBOROUGH
8 Aug 1745 B[I] 1 Robert Knight 17 Dec 1702 30 Mar 1772 69
to     Created Baron Luxborough 8 Aug 1745,
30 Mar 1772 Viscount Barrells and Earl of
Earl of Catherlough 16 May 1763
See "Catherlough"
LYELL
4 Jul 1914 B 1 Sir Leonard Lyell,1st baronet 21 Oct 1850 18 Sep 1926 75
Created Baron Lyell 4 Jul 1914
MP for Orkney and Shetland 1885-1900
18 Sep 1926 2 Charles Anthony Lyell VC 10 Jun 1913 27 Apr 1943 29
For further information on this peer and VC
winner,see the note at the foot of this page
27 Apr 1943 3 Charles Lyell 27 Mar 1939
LYELL OF MARKYATE
27 Jun 2005 B[L] 1 Sir Nicholas Walter Lyell 6 Dec 1938 30 Aug 2010 71
to     Created Baron Lyell of Markyate for life
30 Aug 2010 27 Jun 2005
MP for Hemel Hempstead 1979-1983,Bedfordshire
Mid 1983-1997 and Bedfordshire NE 1997-2001.
Solicitor General 1987-1992. Attorney General
1992-1997. PC 1990
Peerage extinct on his death
LYLE
c 1446 B[S] 1 Robert Lyle c 1470
Created Lord Lyle c 1446
c 1470 2 Robert Lyle c 1500
c 1500 3 Robert Lyle 1511
1511 4 John Lyle 1545
to     On his death the peerage became dormant
1545
LYLE OF WESTBOURNE
13 Sep 1945 B 1 Sir Charles Ernest Leonard Lyle,1st baronet 22 Jul 1882 6 Mar 1954 71
Created Baron Lyle of Westbourne
13 Sep 1945
MP for Stratford 1918-1922, Epping 1922-
1923 and Bournemouth 1940-1945
6 Mar 1954 2 Charles John Leonard Lyle 8 Mar 1905 1 Aug 1976 71
to     Peerage extinct on his death
1 Aug 1976
LYMINGTON
11 Jun 1720 V 1 John Wallop 15 Apr 1690 22 Nov 1762 72
Created Baron Wallop and Viscount
Lymington 11 Jun 1720,and Earl of 
Portsmouth 11 Apr 1743
See "Portsmouth"
LYNDHURST
25 Apr 1827 B 1 John Singleton Copley 21 May 1772 12 Oct 1863 91
to     Created Baron Lyndhurst 25 Apr 1827
12 Oct 1863 MP for Yarmouth IOW 1818, Ashburton 1818-
1826 and Cambridge University 1826. 
Solicitor General 1819-1824. Attorney
General 1824-1826. Master of the Rolls
1826-1827. Lord Chancellor 1827-1830,
1834-1835 and 1841-1846.  PC 1826
Peerage extinct on his death
LYNEDOCH
17 May 1814 B 1 Thomas Graham 19 Oct 1748 18 Dec 1843 95
to     Created Baron Lynedoch 17 May 1814
18 Dec 1843 MP for Perth 1794-1806
Peerage extinct on his death
LYON AND GLAMIS
10 Jul 1606 B[S] 1 Patrick Lyon,Lord Glamis 1575 1 Sep 1616 41
Created Lord Lyon and Glamis and 
Earl of Kinghorn 10 Jul 1606
See "Kinghorn"
LYONS
25 Jun 1856 B 1 Sir Edmund Lyons,1st baronet 21 Nov 1790 23 Nov 1858 68
Created Baron Lyons 25 Jun 1856
23 Nov 1858 2 Richard Bickerton Pemell Lyons 26 Apr 1817 5 Dec 1887 70
24 Nov 1881 V 1 Created Viscount Lyons 24 Nov 1881
to     PC 1865
5 Dec 1887 Peerages extinct on his death
LYONS OF BRIGHTON
22 Jan 1975 B[L] 1 Braham Jack Dennis Lyons 11 Sep 1918 18 Jan 1978 59
to     Created Baron Lyons of Brighton for life
18 Jan 1978 22 Jan 1975
Peerage extinct on his death
LYTTELTON
18 Feb 1641 B 1 Edward Littleton 1589 27 Aug 1645 56
to     Created Baron Lyttelton 18 Feb 1641
27 Aug 1645 MP for Bishops Castle 1614, Leominster
1625 and Carnarvon 1628. Solicitor
General 1634-1640. Lord Keeper 1641-1645
Peerage extinct on his death
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
18 Nov 1756 B 1 Sir George Lyttelton,5th baronet 17 Jan 1709 22 Aug 1773 64
Created Baron Lyttelton 18 Nov 1756
MP for Okehampton 1735-1756. Chancellor
of the Exchequer 1755-1756.  PC 1754
22 Aug 1773 2 Thomas Lyttelton 30 Jan 1744 27 Nov 1779 35
to     MP for Bewdley 1768-1769  PC 1775
27 Nov 1779 Peerage extinct on his death
For further information on the death of this peer,
see the note at the foot of this page
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
13 Aug 1794 B 1 Sir William Henry Lyttelton,7th baronet 24 Dec 1724 14 Sep 1808 83
Created Baron Westcote 29 Apr 1776
and Baron Lyttelton 13 Aug 1794
MP for Bewdley 1748-1755 and 1774-1790
Governor of South Carolina 1755-1760 and 
Jamaica 1760-1766
14 Sep 1808 2 George Fulke Lyttelton 27 Oct 1763 12 Nov 1828 65
MP for Bewdley 1790-1796
12 Nov 1828 3 William Henry Lyttelton 3 Apr 1782 30 Apr 1837 55
MP for Worcestershire 1806-1820. Lord
Lieutenant Worcester 1833-1837
30 Apr 1837 4 George William Lyttelton 31 Mar 1817 18 Apr 1876 59
Lord Lieutenant Worcester 1839-1876
PC 1869
18 Apr 1876 5 Charles George Lyttelton 27 Oct 1842 9 Jun 1922 79
MP for Worcestershire East 1868-1874
He succeeded to the Viscountcy of Cobham
(qv) in 1889 with which title this peerage
then merged
LYTTELTON OF ALDERSHOT
19 Apr 2000 B[L] 1 Thomas Orlando Lyttelton,3rd Viscount Chandos 12 Feb 1953
Created Baron Lyttelton of Aldershot
19 Apr 2000
LYTTON
14 Jul 1866 B 1 Sir Edward George Earle Lytton
Bulwer-Lytton,1st baronet 25 May 1803 18 Jan 1873 69
Created Baron Lytton 14 Jul 1866
MP for St.Ives 1831-1832, Lincoln 1832-
1841 and Hertfordshire 1852-1866. 
Secretary of State for Colonies 1858-1859
PC 1858
18 Jan 1873 2 Edward Robert Lytton Bulwer-Lytton 8 Nov 1831 24 Nov 1891 60
28 Apr 1880 E 1 Created Viscount Knebworth and Earl
of Lytton 28 Apr 1880
Viceroy of India 1876-1880. PC 1888
24 Nov 1891 2 Victor Alexander George Robert
Bulwer-Lytton 9 Aug 1876 25 Oct 1947 71
Governor of Bengal 1922-1927.  PC 1919
KG 1933
25 Oct 1947 3 Neville Stephen Bulwer-Lytton 6 Feb 1879 9 Feb 1951 72
9 Feb 1951 4 Noel Anthony Scawen Lytton 7 Apr 1900 18 Jan 1985 84
18 Jan 1985 5 John Peter Michael Scawen Lytton 7 Jun 1950
LYVEDEN
28 Jun 1859 B 1 Robert Vernon 23 Feb 1800 10 Nov 1873 73
Created Baron Lyveden 28 Jun 1859
MP for Tralee 1829-1831 and Northampton
1831-1859. Secretary at War 1852. President
of the Board of Control 1855-1858.  PC 1841
10 Nov 1873 2 Fitzpatrick Henry Vernon 27 Apr 1824 25 Feb 1900 75
25 Feb 1900 3 Courtenay Robert Percy Vernon 29 Dec 1857 25 Dec 1926 68
For further information on this peer, see the
note at the foot of this page.
25 Dec 1926 4 Robert Fitzpatrick Courtenay Vernon 1 Feb 1892 9 Jan 1969 76
9 Jan 1969 5 Sidney Munro Vernon 21 Nov 1888 19 Sep 1973 84
19 Sep 1973 6 Ronald Cecil Vernon 10 Apr 1915 12 Sep 1999 84
12 Sep 1999 7 Jack Leslie Vernon 10 Nov 1938
Walter William Schomberg Kerr, styled Earl of Ancram (1867-1892), son of the
9th Marquess of Lothian
Ancram was born 29 March 1867, the eldest son of Schomberg Henry Kerr, 9th Marquess of 
Lothian. After entering the army, he was a captain in the 3rd Battalion of the Royal Scots
Lothian Regiment when, in October 1890, he was appointed Aide-de-Camp to the 7th Earl of 
Jersey, who at that time was Governor of New South Wales.
As a result, he proceeded to New South Wales where he was accidentally shot dead on 16 June
1892. Burke's Peerage gives his date of death as 15 June, but it is clear from the following 
reports that he died on 16 June, even after making due allowance for the time difference 
between the United Kingdom and Australia.
Little beyond the mere fact of his death was ever reported in the British newspapers of the 
time. However, as one would expect, his death was fully reported in Australian newspapers.
The following report,dated Friday 17 June, appeared in the 'Sydney Morning Herald' on 18 
June 1892:-
'News was received late last night [i.e. 16 June] of the death of Lord Ancram, who had been 
accidentally shot while out duck shooting with a party consisting of Captain Leigh and Messrs.
H.T. and W.T. Edwards. The accident occurred at a place called Merrianga, about 18 miles 
from Bombala, on the Delegate River. [Bombala is today a small town in the south-east corner
of New South Wales in what is known as 'Platypus Country' after the unique Australian animal,
which are often found in this area. At one time Bombala was considered as a site for the capital
of Australia, but Canberra was eventually chosen for this honour.]
'Great sympathy is expressed on all sides at the death of Lord Ancram.
'An inquest on the body was held at Rowley's Hotel today, before Mr. Coroner Murphy and a
jury of 12. Captain Leigh stated that on Thursday, the 16th June, he was out shooting with
Lord Ancram and Messrs. H.T. Edwards, Wilbraham Edwards, Hugh Greer, and Richard Smith.
About 2 p.m. we had finished luncheon, and Mr. H.T. Edwards proposed we should go on
shooting. I saw Mr. H.T. Edwards and Lord Ancram mount their horses, and was starting to
get my horse, which was about 50 yards away, when I heard an explosion and saw Lord Ancram
fall from his horse. I went to him and found him lying dead. Mr. H.T. Edwards was riding on 
about 70 yards in front of me. There was no one with the deceased when he fell. I don't know
whose gun exploded. It was less than a minute after Lord Ancram and Mr. Edwards mounted
that I heard the explosion. I was the first to reach Lord Ancram. I did not notice his gun on
the ground. I don't think anyone was nearer to deceased than 15 yards when the explosion
took place. The deceased was on friendly terms with all the party.
'H.T. Edwards deposed: I was with the shooting party yesterday on the Delegate River, near
its junction with the Snowy River. After lunch we got our horses to start down the river. The
horses were tied close to where we had lunch, and the guns were lying near them. I got on my
horse and started to ride down the river. I had my gun in my hand. Greer walked on before me.
He had a gun. After riding about 30 yards I heard the report of a gun behind me. I turned back
to see who had shot. When I had gone back 20 yards I saw Lord Ancram lying on the ground,
with blood flowing from his head. Captain Leigh and my nephew were kneeling at his head. I 
said, "In the name of Heaven, how did it happen?" My nephew and Captain Leigh did not seem
to have any idea of how the accident occurred. I knelt down beside Lord Ancram, and saw that
life was almost extinct. He breathed for a few moments after. We then washed the blood from
his face. The accident occurred at 1.15 p.m. We then made a litter and carried the body to the
road, about a mile away. I have no idea how it occurred. I did not see Lord Ancram get on his 
horse. There were two or three guns lying near the deceased. I cannot say whether they were
loaded.
'Wilbraham Edwards stated: Just after luncheon yesterday I took up my gun, from which I had
previously extracted the cartridges, and put it alongside of Smith's, which was a muzzle-loader,
and wadded. I then got my horse, took up one of the guns, and proceeded to mount; but it
being a nasty vicious animal, it started forward and bumped and squeezed me against either
Leigh's or Smith's horse. During the confusion an explosion took place. I looked underneath my
horse to see if I had shot him. Then I heard Captain Leigh call out, "Good God! Look at Ancram." 
I went over to him immediately and found him shot all over the face. I could not say whether 
it was the gun I was carrying that exploded. I may have taken up the muzzle-loader by mistake. 
I found afterwards that the muzzle-loader had exploded, and was marked all down the barrel as 
if it had been kicked by a horse. The gun was lying on the ground amongst the horses after the
explosion. I did not see the deceased when the gun went off. I am not sure that I had the gun
in my hand when it exploded. I don't know what became of the gun. In the confusion I may
have dropped it. I don't think the horse kicked the gun when I was trying to get on, and caused
the explosion. When I first saw the deceased lying on the ground he was about five yards from
me. I am certain the explosion was accidental. Sometimes I think the gun exploded above and
sometimes below the horse. I could not say which for certain. I was on friendly terms with the
deceased.
'The jury decided not to call any further evidence, and without retiring returned a verdict as
follows: - "We find that the deceased, William, Earl of Ancram, came to his death at Merrianga,
on the 16th June, by means of a gunshot wound in the head, accidentally received."
Flora Rawdon-Hastings, Countess of Loudoun in her own right (6th in line)
and her daughter, Lady Flora Hastings
Flora was the daughter of James Mure-Campbell, 5th Earl of Loudoun (pronounced "Looden").
On her father's death in 1786, she inherited the Earldom, since the Earldom's remainder 
permitted descent of the title in the female line.
In Jul 1804, she married Francis Rawdon-Hastings,2nd Earl of Moira, who was 26 years older 
than her. After serving in the British Army during the American Revolution, he was Governor-
General of India between 1813 and 1823. During this period, he was promoted in the 
peerage to the 1st Marquess of Hastings in 1817. His last posting was as Governor of Malta
from 1824 to 1826.
Notwithstanding the difference in their ages, the marriage of the Marquess of Hastings and
the Countess of Loudoun was extremely happy, both parties being devoted to each other. 
When the Marquess died at sea off Naples in 1826, his wife was at the family home in 
Scotland. Finding it impossible that his remains could be conveyed back to Scotland for
burial in the family vault, he directed that, after death, his right hand should be cut off at
the wrist and taken back to Scotland, to be ultimately buried with his wife upon her death.
Fourteen years later, as the Countess lay dying in Loudoun Castle, she sent for the small
metal box in which her late husband's hand had been preserved. The metal box was placed
in the bed alongside the Countess and remained there until she died, when it was placed in
her coffin to be buried with her.
The Countess was the mother of Lady Flora Elizabeth Hastings, the unfortunate subject of
one of the most painful scandals of the 19th century, and the scandal which arguably did
the most damage to royal prestige in that period. In early 1834, Lady Flora had been appointed
Lady of the Bedchamber to the Duchess of Kent, mother of the future Queen Victoria. The
Duchess's household was dominated by John Conroy [for further information on him see the 
note under his baronetcy] who was loathed by Victoria, and Lady Flora, being part of his
circle, also earned Victoria's enmity.
Politics, too, played a major role in the forthcoming scandal. The Hastings family followed the
Tory [i.e. Conservative] side of politics, but the ruling party at the time (and as a result the
party which appointed most of the members of the Royal Household such as Ladies in
Waiting) were the Whigs [i.e. Liberals] under Viscount Melbourne.
In early 1839, Lady Flora consulted one of the royal physicians, Sir James Clark, about abdominal
pains and a swollen stomach, but did not let him conduct a physical examination. The change
in her figure soon aroused the obvious suspicion, and Victoria (who at this time was still a
teenager) recorded in her diary that Lady Flora was pregnant, accusing Sir John Conroy of being
the father. The Whig-dominated Ladies in Waiting were outraged and demanded Lady Flora's 
removal, but no action was taken until one of the Ladies requested Sir James Clark to make
Lady Flora aware of the gossip circulating throughout the Royal Household. When Lady Flora 
heard of this, she demanded a medical examination, in order to dispel the rumours. After the
examination had been completed, Lady Flora was totally vindicated - not only was she not
pregnant, but the doctors confirmed she was still a virgin.
Word of the affair soon spread beyond the palace walls. Lady Flora had told her family all of
the details and they naturally wished to know who was to blame for the slander on their family
member. The Hastings family contacted the press, and soon accusations and counter-
accusations were flying thick and fast, each of these flavoured by the Tory leanings of the
Hastings family or the politics of the incumbent Whig government. The result was that the
Hastings family supplied copies of correspondence to the papers which was extremely damaging
to Queen Victoria, her Ladies in Waiting and Viscount Melbourne, the Prime Minister. 
On 7 May 1839, Melbourne resigned precipitating what became known as the "Bedchamber 
Crisis." Sir Robert Peel, the leader of the Tory party, was invited to form a new government, but
he made it a condition that the Queen dismiss some of her Whig-appointed Ladies in Waiting. 
Victoria flatly refused to do this, believing that they were friends and confidants rather than
political appointees, and possibly also because their dismissal would be interpreted as an
admission of guilt in the Lady Flora Hastings affair. Peel therefore declined to form a new
administration and Melbourne was again returned to power.
In the meantime, Lady Flora's health continued to deteriorate and by early June 1839, she had
been confined to bed in Buckingham Palace, where she lingered until she died, aged 33, on 
5 July 1839. At the subsequent autopsy, it was found that the cause of her swollen abdomen,
and the eventual cause of her death, was a tumour on her liver.
Her death caused a fresh outbreak of criticism of the Queen, which only died down months later.
Lady Flora's family, however, never forgave her, and the Hastings family and, by marriage, the
Marquesses of Bute, refused to have anything to do with the Queen during the rest of her reign.
Thomas Oliver Plunkett, 11th Baron Louth
Lord Louth was a magistrate who abused his position to unjustly imprison one of his
tenants. The following report is from 'The Aberdeen Journal' of 3 July 1811:-
'Lord Louth was this day brought up in the Court of King's Bench to receive judgement, being
convicted in last Trinity Term upon a criminal information for abusing his authority, and
oppression as a Magistrate in 1809, in issuing a warrant against _____ Mathews, his tenant,
the Prosecutor, and having him arrested and committed to Dundalk Goal [sic] for an alleged
felony, and having cut timber upon his Lordship's estate between sunrise and sun-set.
'Judge Day recited the evidence given on the trial, from which it appeared that the Prosecutor
held under the Defendent [sic], since the year 1801, a piece of ground in the county of Louth,
and was in the employment of his Lordship as a labourer. No disagreement took place between
them, until the Defendent took a fancy to about four acres of the Prosecutor's land, which the
latter refused to part with; and this drew down upon him the displeasure of his Lordship,
which manifested itself in several acts of oppression. In te month of December, 1809, the act
for which the Defendant was now before the Court was committed. On a Monday in that month
he summoned the P[r]osecutor before him, for the alleged offence of cutting the timber; but
the charge was not acted upon, and he was sent away, with orders to attend again on
Saturday. His Lordship, however, did not wait for the expiration of the time, but on the
intermediate Thursday he went with a constable to the Prosecutor's house, and arrested him 
upon the warrant. In vain did he implore his Lordship's clemency, urging that his wife was
despaired of in a fever, and that his child lay dead in the next apartment to her. In vain did
he urge his innocence; for, after a most minute investigation, not a trace appeared to
warrant the charge of cutting the trees, none having ever grown where they were alleged to
have been cut. His Lordship was inexorable, and, without either oath, information, or any
document whatever to substantiate the charge, committed the Prosecutor to prison for a
felony, where he lay confined in a dungeon, as a felon, for 24 days, and was not delivered
until the Assizes, when he was discharged, for want of prosecution. The defence set up by
the Defendent on his trial was error in judgment; but every circumstance tended to prove
that his Lordship was actuated by malicious motives, and that is was done in revenge, in 
consequence of the Prosecutor's refusal to give up the few acres. The Learned Judge, after
expatiating upon the several parts of this case in the most eloquent and impressive terms,
stated that the Court had taken a considerable time to mature their opinion of what the
sentence ought to be, and thereby afforded the Defendent an opportunity for making
compensation to the Prosecutor, which had been done; but that reparation to the Public
for the injury yet remained, and, in order to set an example to Magistrates, no matter what
their rank, that the British Code of Law, like the Supreme Being, was no respecter of person
or rank, the Court had decided as the sentence of his Lordship, that he be imprisoned in
Newgate for three calender [sic] months. His Lordship made a bow and retired with the
Sheriff.'
The Lovat peerage claims of 1885 and 1897
In June 1885, the Committee for Privileges of the House of Lords heard a claim by a Mr. John
Fraser, of Carnarvon in Wales, to the Lovat peerage. His claim was eventually dismissed, 
following which 'The Times' commented on the case as follows [26 June 1885]:-
'The claim of Mr. John Fraser, of Carnarvon, to the dignity of Lord Lovat of the peerage of
Scotland was rejected yesterday by the unanimous sentence of the Committee of Privileges
of the House of Lords. In Lord Bramwell's opinion the claim was honestly made; but this was
the utmost that Lord Bramwell or any other member of the Committee could find to say in
favour of it. It was improbable on the face of it, and the more it was looked into the stronger
did the improbabilities appear. Of direct evidence there was little or none brought forward in its
support, and plenty that was absolutely fatal to it. The case furnishes, at best, good material
for a romance; but the story teller who adopts it must take liberties with the dates and facts
if he is to present it in a form sufficiently credible to satisfy the demands of fiction. That the
Committee of Privileges would accept it became more and more unlikely as the case went on,
and when the case for the present holder of the title had been heard all doubt was at an end.
The veritable history of the Lovat peerage and of its past holders has been strange enough,
but fiction has, for once, been found stranger than the truth - too starnge for Mr. Charles
Russell's advocacy, or for the belief of the Committee of Privileges.
'The Lovat peerage case takes us back to very remote days. The disputed title is held by a
descendant of the second son of Alexander, the fourth Lord Lovat, who died in 1558. This Lord
Lovat was succeeded by his eldest son, Hugh, whose line became extinct in 1815, the title
meanwhile having been forfeited by the attainder of the tenth [sic for eleventh] lord - an 
attainder which was reversed in 1857 in favour of the father of the present lord. The claim of 
the present lord is thus derived through a younger branch of the family, and is valid only if
the elder branch has become extinct. The case of Mr. John Fraser, of Carnarvon, is that the
elder branch has survived, and that he is the present representative of it. The whole question
turns on the history and the date of the death of Alexander Fraser, eldest son of Thomas of
Beaufort, a younger son of the seventh Lord Lovat, who died in 1646. It is certain that Thomas
of Beaufort's line came duly to the succession, but the line was continued, not in Alexander,
the eldest son, but in the younger son, Simon. The case put forward for John Fraser is that this
ought not to have been, inasmuch that Alexander, the elder son, was alive at the time.
Alexander, it was shown, was born not later than 1663. In 1689 he raised a force of clansmen
to aid the rebellion under Dundee and on this account and as having been guilty of a homicide
his life was in danger from the law. [The homicide charge related to the murder of a musician
whom Alexander Lovat believed had insulted his family]. It seems, however, from the bills of
mortality of the parish of Wardlaw, that Alexander Fraser died in 1689, pre-deceasing his
father, Thomas of Beaufort. If this was so, there was an end to the petitioner's case, for it
was not so much as alleged that Alexander Fraser had been married at that date [and therefore
could not have left legitimate heirs]. But the petitioner's case is that Alexander Fraser did not
die in 1689, but that he made his escape to Wales and there married and left issue. That there
was an Alexander Fraser in Wales about that time and that the petitioner is his eldest 
descendant was satisfactorily made out. The doubt was as to the identity of the two 
Alexanders. Alexander the Welshman was proved to have been a common miner, who had 
worked in the land mines on the Marquis of Powis's estate, and had earned wages of 1s 4d a
day up to the year 1776, in which year he died. In the year 1738 this man had married, and had
had issue, his last child having being born in 1758. This is a strange history. It implies that the
Welsh Alexander, if he is identified with his Scotch namesake, reached the almost patriarchal
age of 113 at least, that he wooed and won a young wife of good family when he was 75 years
of age, and that he was 95 when his last child was born. The handwritings of the two 
Alexanders, some specimens of which were produced before the Committee, were as unlike as
their personalities seemed to be. Even their names were not quite the same. Alexander Fraser
of Beaufort always began his name with two small ff's. Alexander of Wales began with a capital 
F, and signed his name sometimes as Fresar, sometimes as Fresr. It would have needed strong
direct testimony in support of John Fraser's case to get over such grave difficulties as the
above, but no such testimony was produced. There was a family tradion among the miner's
descendants that they were entitled to the Lovat peerage, and this was about all. John Fraser's
explanation of his ancestor's mode of life was that it was absolutely necessary for him to be in
hiding, and that he worked as a common miner in order to be out of sight and safe. The Marquis
of Powis, on whose estates he worked, was, like himself, a Jacobite, and was, moreover, a
friend of the Lovat family. This might explain why it was that the exile had sought shelter with
the Marquis of Powis, but it was not very friendly on the Marquis's part to put his illustrious
guest to work in his mines, and to keep him at work there when he was some way advanced in 
his second century of life.
'The concealment of identity between the Scotch refugee and the Welsh miner was so complete
and so thoroughly successful that it has carried conviction to the mind of the Committee of
Privileges. Their resolve is that John Fraser has failed to establish his case. If they had come to
an opposite conclusion, it would have been much the same as far as John Fraser was concerned.
The title he sought had been in abeyance, and had been revived in 1857 by a special Act in
favour of the father of the present lord. The present lord has a twofold right to the title of Lord
Lovat, as a Scotch peer and a baron of the United Kingdom. John Fraser's petition was for the
Scotch peerage, and the utmost he could have shown about this was that Lord Lovat has no
right to it. This defect of title would have been without remedy, for the Crown has no power
to create fresh Scotch peerages [as specified in the Act of Union of 1707]. John Fraser's
success, therefore, would have amounted merely to a confirmation of his family tradition. He
would have proved his right to a title which had no existence until the Crown might be pleased
to revive it for him.  It would be hard to find a more perfect instance of much ado about nothing
than this whole case has been.'
In November 1897, John Fraser tried again. 'The Times' of 17 November 1897 reported that:-
'Lord Low, in the Court of Session, Edinburgh, yesterday gave judgment in the action in which
John Fraser, of Lovat-lodge, 10 Harrington-square, London, N.W., sues the Lord Advocate, as
representing her Majesty's Woods and Forests, and also Lord Lovat, Beaufort Castle, Inverness-
shire, to have it declared that, as the heir male inter aliaof Hugh, fifth Lord Lovat - the present
Lord Lovat being a descendant of the second son of the sixth Lord Lovat - he is entitled to the
barony and lands of Lovat and to the title of Lord Lovat. He also seeks to have the defender,
Lord Lovat, ordained to account for his intromissions with the estate since his succession in
1887 [the previous Lord Lovat against whom he had brought the 1885 case had died in 1887, 
and he was thus suing the son of the previous peer], or to make payment of £120,000. Lord
Low gave judgment for the defender. He held that Lord Lovat had produced a good prescriptive
title, and that it was incompetent to go behind it and inquire into the origin and previous history
of the title. Dealing next with the pursuer's contention that the barony and lands of Lovat 
should be declared an appanage of the title, that the barony and lands could only be held by
the person legally entitled to the peerage, his Lordship said that the pursuer averred that the
title was not created by patent, but that his ancestors who held that title sat as lords of
Parliament in the Scottish Parliament, and that the lands and barony were bestowed on them
by the Crown as an appanage of the title. The pursuer founded [his case] on the Crown charter
of 1539 in favour of Hugh, fifth Lord Lovat, erecting the lands into the barony of Lovat. By that
deed the lands had, his Lordship held, been held since 1539 under an ordinary feudal title, and
there was no room for holding them to be an appanage of the title, assuming such a state of
matters to be known to the law of Scotland. But further, in 1894 [1885?], the pursuer claimed
the peerage of Lovat, and the finding of the Committee of Privileges in the House of Lords was
that the pursuer had no title to the right, dignity, and honours claimed in his petition. That
finding seemed to be destructive of the claim founded on the assumption that he was Lord 
Lovat. Lord Low dismissed the action against both sets of defenders, with expenses.'
Fraser immediately appealed this decision, but his appeal was dismissed in February 1898.
Charles Anthony Lyell VC, 2nd Baron Lyell
In April 1943, Lyell was a temporary Captain in the 1st Battalion, Scots Guards, who were 
at that time stationed in Tunisia. Lyell's actions during the period 22 April to 27 April earned
him a posthumous Victoria Cross. 
The citation, which was published in "The Times" of 13 August 1943, reads as follows:-
'From April 22 to 27, 1943, Captain Lord Lyell commanded his company, which had just been
placed under the orders of a battalion of the Grenadier Guards, with great gallantry, ability
and cheerfulness. He led it down a slope under heavy mortar fire to repel a German counter-
attack on April 22, led it again under heavy fire through the battalion's first objective on
April 23 in order to capture and consolidate a high point, and held this point through a very
trying period of shelling, heat, and shortage of water. During this period, through his energy
and cheerfulness, he not only kept up the fighting spirit of his company but also managed
through radiotelephony, which he worked himself from an exposed position, to bring most
effective artillery fire to bear on enemy tanks, vehicles, and infantry positions.
'At about 1800 hours on April 27 this officer's company was taking part in the battalion's
attack on Dj Bou Arara [Tunisia]. The company was held up in the foothills by heavy fire from
an enemy post on the left; this post consisted of an 88 millimetre gun and a heavy machine-
gun in separate pits. Realizing that until this post was destroyed the advance could not
proceed, Lord Lyell collected the only available men not pinned down by fire - a sergeant, a
lance-corporal, and two guardsmen - and led them to attack it. He was a long way in advance 
of the others and lobbed a hand grenade into the machine-gun pit, destroying the crew. At
this point his sergeant was killed and both the guardsmen were wounded. The lance-corporal
got down to give covering fire to Lord Lyell, who had run stright on towards the 88 millimetre
gun pit and was working his way round to the left of it.
'So quickly had this officer acted that he was in among the crew with the bayonet before
they had time to fire more than one shot. He killed a number of them before being overwhelmed
and killled himself. The few survivors of the gun crew then left the pit, some of them being killed
while they were retiring, and both the heavy machine-gun and 88 millimetre gun were silenced.
'The company was then able to advance and take its objective.
'There is no doubt that Lord Lyell's outstanding leadership, gallantry and self-sacrifice enabled
his company to carry out its task, which had an important bearing on the success of the
battalion and of the brigade.'
Thomas Lyttelton, 2nd Baron Lyttelton
Lyttelton is the subject of possibly the most famous ghost story in English history. His career
falls into two broad sections - dissipated rake in his earlier days, and rising politician in his
final years. I will expand upon Lyttelton's earlier career at some future time, but for now I will
content myself with the story of Lord Lyttelton's death. The story below is taken from 
"Chambers' Book of Days" [its full title is "The Book of Days: A Miscellany of Popular Antiquities
in Connection with the Calendar, including Anecdote, Biography and History, Curiosities of
History and Oddities of Human Life and Character"] written by Robert Chambers and first 
published in 1832.
'Thomas, second Lord Lyttelton, who died November 27, 1779, at the age of thirty five, was as
remarkable for his reckless and dissipated life not to speak of impious habits of thought as his
father had been for the reverse. One of the wicked actions attributed to him, was the seduction
of three Misses Amphlett, who resided near his country residence in Shropshire. He had just
returned from Ireland where he left one of these ladies when, residing at his house in Hill Street,
Berkeley Square, he was attacked with suffocating fits of a threatening character. According to
one account, he dreamed one night that a fluttering bird came to his window, and that presently
after a woman appeared to him in white apparel, who told him to prepare for death, as he would
not outlive three days. He was much alarmed, and called for his servant, who found him in a
profuse perspiration, and to whom he related the circumstance which had occurred. According
to another account, from a relative of his lordship, he was still awake when the noise of a bird
fluttering at the window called his attention; his room seemed filled with light, and he saw in the
recess of the window a female figure, being that of a lady whom he had injured, who, pointing
to the clock on the mantel piece, then indicating twelve o'clock, said in a severe tone that, at
that hour on the third day after, his life would be concluded, after which she vanished and left
the room in darkness.
'That some such circumstance, in one or other of these forms, was believed by Lord Lyttelton
to have occurred, there can be no reasonable doubt, for it left him in a depression of spirits
which caused him to speak of the matter to his friends. On the third day, he had a party with
him at breakfast, including Lord Fortescue, Lady Flood, and two Misses Amphlett, to whom he
remarked: "If I live over tonight, I shall have jockeyed the ghost, for this is the third day." The
whole party set out in the forenoon for his lordship's country house, Pit Place, near Epsom,
where he had not long arrived when he had one of his suffocating fits. Nevertheless, he was
able to dine with his friends at five o'clock. By a friendly trick, the clocks throughout the 
house, and the watches of the whole party, including his lordship's, were put forward half an
hour. The evening passed agreeably; the ghostly warning was never alluded to; and Lord
Lyttelton seemed to have recovered his usual gaiety.
'At half past eleven, he retired to his bedroom, and soon after got into bed, where he was to 
take a dose of rhubarb and mint water. According to the report afterwards given by his valet,
he kept every now and then looking at his watch. He ordered his curtains to be closed at the
foot. It was now within a minute or two of twelve by his watch; he asked to look at mine, and
seemed pleased to find it nearly keep time with his own. His lordship then put both to his ear,
to satisfy himself that they went. When it was more than a quarter after twelve by our 
watches, he said: "This mysterious lady is not a true prophetess, I find." When it was near the
real hour of twelve, he said: "Come, I'll wait no longer; get me my medicine; I'll take it, and try
to sleep."
'Perceiving the man stirring the medicine with a toothpick, Lord Lyttelton scolded him, and sent
him away for a teaspoon, with which he soon after returned. He found his master in a fit, with
his chin, owing to the elevation of the pillow, resting hard upon his neck. Instead of trying to
revive him, he ran for assistance, and when he came back with the alarmed party of guests,
Lord Lyttelton was dead.
'Amongst the company at Pit Place that day, was Mr. Miles Peter Andrews, a companion of
Lord Lyttelton. Having business at the Dartford powder mills, in which he was a partner, he
left the house early, but not before he had been pleasingly assured that his noble friend was
restored to his usual good spirits. So little did the ghost adventure rest in Mr. Andrews's 
mind, that he did not even recollect the time whwn it was predicted the event would take
place. He had been half an hour in bed at his partner, Mr. Pigou's house at the mill, when
suddenly his curtains were pulled open, and Lord Lyttelton appeared before him at his
bedside, and thought it so odd a freak of his friend, that he began to reproach him for his
folly in coming down to Dartford Mills without notice, as he could find no accommodation. 
However, said he, I'll get up, and see what can be done. He turned to the other side of the
bed, and rang the bell, when Lord Lyttelton disappeared. His servant soon after coming in,
he inquired: "Where is Lord Lyttelton?" The servant, all astonishment, declared he had not seen
anything of his lordship since they left Pit Place. "Pshaw! You fool, he was here this moment
at my bedside." The servant persisted that it was not possible. Mr. Andrews dressed himself,
and with the assistance of the servants, searched every part of the house and garden; but no
Lord Lyttelton was to be found. Still Mr. Andrews could not help believing that Lord Lyttelton
had played him this trick, till, about four o'clock the same day, an express arrived to inform him
of his lordship's death, and the manner of it.
'An attempt has been made to invalidate the truth of this recital, but on grounds more than
usually weak. It has been surmised that Lord Lyttelton meant to take poison, and imposed the
story of the warning on his friends; as if he would have chosen for a concealment of his design,
a kind of imposture which, as the opinions of mankind go, is just the most hard of belief. This
supposition. Morever, overlooks, and is inconsistent with, the fact that Lord Lyttelton was
deceived as to the hour by the tampering with the watches; if he meant to destroy himself,
he ought to have done it half an hour sooner. It is further affirmed and the explanation is said
to have come from Lord Fortescue, who was of the party at Pit Place that the story of the
vision took its rise in a recent chase for a lady's pet bird, which Lord Lyttelton declared had
been harassingly reproduced to him in his dreams. Lord Fortescue may have been induced, by
the usual desire of escaping from a supra natural theory, to surmise that the story had some
such foundation; but it coheres with no other facts in the case, and fails to account for the
impression on Lord Lyttelton's mind, that he had been warned of his coming death a fact of
which all his friends bore witness.
'On the other hand, we have the Lyttelton family fully of belief that the circumstances were as
here related. Dr. Johnson tells us, that he heard it from Lord Lyttelton's uncle, Lord Westcote,
and he was therefore willing to believe it. There was, in the Dowager Lady Lyttelton's house,
in Portugal Street, Grosvenor Square, a picture which she herself executed in 1780, expressly
to commemorate the event; it hung in a conspicuous part of her drawing room. The dove 
appears at the window, while a female figure, habited in white, stands at the foot of the bed,
announcing to Lord Lyttelton his dissolution. Every part of the picture was faithfully designed,
after the description given to her by the valet de chambre who attended him, to whom his
master related all the circumstances. The evidence of Mr. Andrews is also highly important. 
Mr. J.W. Croaker [sic for Croker], in his notes on Boswell, attests that he had more than once
heard Mr. Andrews relate the story, with details substantially agreeing with the recital which
we have quoted from the Gentleman's Magazine. He was unquestionably good evidence for
what had occurred to himself, and he may be considered as not a bad reporter of the story of
the ghost of the lady which he had heard from Lord Lyttelton's own mouth. Mr. Croker adds, 
that Mr. Andrews always told the tale reluctantly, and with an evidently solemn conviction of
its truth. On the whole, then, the Lyttelton ghost story may be considered as not only one of 
the most remarkable from its compound character, one spiritual utterance supporting another,
but also one of the best authenticated, and which is most difficult to explain away, if we are
to allow human testimony to be of the least value.'
Courtenay Robert Percy Vernon. 4th Baron Lyveden
The following is an extract from the 'Chicago Daily Tribune' of 29 May 1910.
'[A] peer who has brought to the House of Lords the knowledge of what it is to have to
toil for daily bread is Lord Lyveden. He is well known in the United States as the organizer
of visits of municipal authorities and of members of parliament to this country for the
purpose of instruction and of the promotion of a better understanding between the two
great English speaking powers. Lord Lyveden, as Courtney Vernon, having failed to pass
his examination for a commission in the army, enlisted in the Royal Artillery, then became
an actor in the Bancroft Haymarket company, migrated to New York where, losing his money,
he became in turn waiter in a Bowery restaurant, a market gardener in Wilmington, Del., a
hackman in New York and in Charlotte, N.C., the part owner of a small fishing boat at
Charleston, which foundered on the night of the earthquake in 1885; a cabin steward on
the American ocean liner City of Paris, a purser on some of the lake steamers, impresario
of a company touring the United States and caterer to a navigation company on its vessels
running between Hamburg and Harwich.'
Copyright @ 2003-2010  Leigh Rayment