LORD FAIRFAX.
(Vol. ix., p. 10.)
Your correspondent W. H. M. has called my attention to his Note, and requested me to answer the third of his Queries.
The present rightful heir to the barony of Fairfax, should he wish to claim it, is a citizen of the United States, and a resident in the State of Virginia. He is addressed, as any other American gentleman would be, Mr., when personally spoken to, and as an Esquire in correspondence.
A friend of mine, Captain W., has thus kindly answered the other Queries of W. H. M.:
1. Sir Thomas Fairfax of Denton in Yorkshire was employed in several diplomatic affairs by Queen Elizabeth, and particularly in negotiations with James VI. of Scotland. By Charles I. he was created a peer of Scotland, his patent having been dated at Whitehall on Oct. 18, A.D. 1627.
2. The family of Fairfax never possessed property, or land, in Scotland, and had no connexion with that country beyond their peerage. Many English gentlemen were created peers of Scotland by the Stuart kings, although unconnected with the nation by descent or property. I may cite the following instances:—The old Yorkshire House of Constable of Burton received a peerage in the person of Sir Henry Constable of Burton and Halsham; by patent, dated Nov. 14, 1620, Sir Henry was created Viscount Dunbar and Lord Constable. Sir Walter Aston of Tixal in Staffordshire, Bart., was created Baron Aston of Forfar by Charles I., Nov. 28, 1627. And, lastly, Sir Thomas Osborne of Kineton, Bart., was created by Charles II., Feb. 2, 1673, Viscount Dumblane.
3. Answered.
4. William Fairfax, fourth son of Henry Fairfax of Tolston, co. York, second son of Henry, fourth Lord Fairfax, settled in New England in America, and was agent for his cousin Thomas, sixth lord, and had the entire management of his estates in Virginia. His third and only surviving son, Bryan Fairfax, was in holy orders, and resided in the United States. On the death of Robert, seventh Lord Fairfax, July 15, 1793, this Bryan went to England and preferred his claim to the peerage, which was determined in his favour by the House of Lords. He then returned to America. Bryan Fairfax married a Miss Elizabeth Cary, and had several children. (Vide Douglas, and Burke's Peerage.)
There are several English families who possess Scottish peerages, but they are derived from Scottish ancestors, as Talmash, Radclyffe, Eyre, &c.
Perhaps the writer may be permitted to inform your correspondent W. H. M. that the term "subject" is more commonly and correctly applied to a person who owes allegiance to a crowned head, and "citizen" to one who is born and lives under a republican form of government.
W. W.
Malta.
1. Thomas, first Lord Fairfax (descended from a family asserted to have been seated at Towcester, co. Northampton, at the time of the Norman invasion and subsequently of note in Yorkshire), accompanied the Earl of Essex into France, temp. Eliz., and was knighted by him in the camp before Rouen. He was created a peer of Scotland, 4th May, 1627; but why of Scotland, or for what services, I know not.
2. I cannot discover that the family ever possessed lands in Scotland. They were formerly owners of Denton Castle, co. York (which they sold to the family of Ibbetson, Barts.), and afterwards of Leeds Castle, Kent.
3. Precise information on this point is looked for from some transatlantic correspondent.
4. The claim of the Rev. Bryan, eighth Lord Fairfax, was admitted by the House of Lords, 6th May, 1800 (H. L. Journals). He was, I presume, born before the acknowledgment of independence.
5. The title seems to be erroneously retained in the Peerages, as the gentleman now styled Lord Fairfax cannot, it is apprehended, be a natural-born subject of the British Crown, or capable of inheriting the dignity. It seems, therefore, that the peerage, if not extinct, awaits another claimant. As a direct authority, I may refer to the case of the Scottish earldom of Newburgh, in the succession to which the next heir (the Prince Gustiniani), being an alien, was passed over as a legal nonentity. (See Riddell on Scottish Peerages, p. 720.) There is another case not very easily reconcilable with the last, viz. that of the Earl of Athlone, who, though a natural-born subject of the Prince of Orange, was on 10th March, 1795, permitted to take his seat in the House of Lords in Ireland (Journals H. L. I.). Perhaps some correspondent will explain this case.
H. G.