Page:The Complete Peerage Ed 1 Vol 4.djvu/141

HAMILTON. 143 rem. failing heirs male of his body, to his brother William, and the heirs male of his body, with rem. to the eldest heir feranlo of his own body and the heirs male of her body, bearing the name and arms of Hamilton, with rem. to his own legit, heirs whatsoever. He was, however, 8 months later imprisoned on (apparently) a false charge, not being set free till April 1016. He was 10 Aug. 1646, made Hereditary Keeper of Holyrood house and in 1618, was at the head of the Scotch forces (24,000), who entered Kngland for the relief of the King and who were defeated by about 9,000 men under Cromwell and Lambert, to whom on 25 Aug. 1618, he surrendered himself.^) Hem. in 1620 (his age being 14, and hers but 7), Mary, da. of William (Fkilding), 1st Eahl ok Denbigh, by Mary, sister of George, the well known Duke ok Buckingham, da. of Sir George Villikrs. She, who was a Lady of the Bedchamber to Henrietta Maria, the Queen Consort, d. at Walling- ford House, Charing Cross, 10, and was bur. 12 May 163S in Westni. Abbey. Fun. certif. in Pub. Record Oftice. The Duke was indicted as Eur! of Cambridge for invading England in a hostile manner, was tried 6 Feb., and was 6 March 164S/9, sentenced to death by the High Court of Justice. He was (together with the Earl of Holland and the Lord Capell of Hadham) beheaded (a few weeks after the King), in Palace yard, Westminster,( h ) 9 .March 1643/9, aged 42. He d. s.p.m.s. and was bur. at Hamilton. On his death the Barony of Hamilton [S.], and the Barony of Aberbrothwiek [S.], became dormant.( c ) {"■) " Hamilton had never conducted any operation of life with succe33 and he was not likely to succeed in war," remarks Dr. Gardiner in the "Nat. Biogr." Lord Clarendon says of him that " He had more enemies and fewer friends in court or country " than any one else, that " His natural darkness and reservt*ion in his discourse, made him to be thought a wise man, and his having been ill command under the King of Sweden, Sec, made him be thought a great soldier, a.i 1 both these mistakes were the cause that made him looked upon as a worse and more dangerous man than in truth lie deserved to be." See also Burnet's " Dukes of Hamilton." ('■>) See " The Loyalist's Bloody Hull " in vol. i, p. 194, note " c," sub " Aubigny." (■-•) As to the Biironi/ of Hamilton [S. ], a: 1445, Anne, 1st da. and coheir of the 1st Duke (afterwards [1651] siio jure Duchess of Hamilton, &c. [3-]) was at his death (1649) heir of line thereto as also to the Barony of Aberbrothwiek [S.] cr. 1608. She, however, does not appear to have assumed them either iu 1649, or when, in 1651, she sue. to the Dukedom of Hamilton, kc. Her right as heir at line to these Baronies would pass to her sou and thence to the subsequent Dukes, till the death in 1799 of the 8th Duke, when it would devolve on that Duke's nephew, Edward (Stanley), 13th Earl of Derby, the heir general of the house of Hamilton. See tabular pedigree, vol. i, p. 6, sub " Abercoru." This Barony of Hamilton, if unaffected by resignations and regrants must siuce 1643 be either in the heir of line (the family of Stanley, since 1799) or, if a male fief, in the heir iin(e, the Earl of Abercom [S.] See p. 138, note "d." It appears to be lust mentioned on 13 March 1542/3, when in an act of Pari. [S.], its owner is described as " James, Earl of Arran, Lord Hamilton." When, however, such owner became " Marquess of Hamilton," it seems to dis- appear, tho' other subordinate Baronies are set forth in the Garter plates (1623 and 1630) of these Marquesses. See p. 141, note " b. It would almost seem (tho' the theory appeals never to have been started by those most competent to form an opinion thereon) that, when a Scotch peerage was conferred of higher rank but of the same name as one already possessed by the grantee, such inferior title disappeared, beiin: (as it were) swallowed up in the higher dignity. Thus (as above mentioned) the Barony of Hamilton disappears when, in 1599, the owner is made Marquess of Hamilton; so, also, this said Mar- quessate of Hamilton (for which apparently the Marquessate of Clydesdale was sub- stituted) likewise disappears, and is not (as, for the same reason, neither is the Barony of Hamilton) mentioned along with all the other titles to which the owner was entitled, when iu 1643, he was made Duke of Hamilton. So, also, when, iu 1599, the Earl of Huntly was cr. Marquess of Huntly, the proclamation is " Marquis of Huntly, Earl of Enzie," && (the Earldom of Huntly being ignored) while when, on the same day, the Earl of Arran was cr. Marquess of Hamilton, his Earldom (not being of the same name as the superior title) was recognised, the proclamation being " Marquis of Hamilton, Earl of Arran," &c. So, also, when in 1682, the Earl of Qucensbcrnj, Viscount Drumlanriy, &c, is made Marquess of Quccnsberry, Earl of