Page:The Complete Peerage Ed 1 Vol 4.djvu/142

144 HAMILTON. [Charles Hamilton, styled Earl of Arran, 1st s. aiul h. ap. He <I, young and nnm. T.p (probably aged about 10) and was bur. 30 April 1040, in Weatara. Abbey.] Dukedom [S.] 1 <? ami £ William (Hamilton), Duke of tj I Hamilton [1643], Marquess ok Hamilton [1599], f 1649 MahWBKSS of Clydesdale [1 6-133, E A11L OF AllRAN Marquessate [S.] .' ' [1503], Earl of Lanark [1030], Karl of Aruan _ AND CAMBRIDGE [11343], LoRr SlACnANSYHK( a ) AND iv - J Polmont [1639]. and Lord Avon and Innerdale [1643], in Scotland, also Earl of Cambridge and Baron of Ennehpale [1619], in England, br. and h. male (but not heir general), being also heir special to the Dukedom [S.] and other titles cr. therewith in 1643. He was 6. 14 Dee. 1616 ; ed. at the Univ. of Glasgow, ami having IB,, 26 May 1638, at St. Anne's, Blackfriars (Lie. London, he 22, she 18) Elizabeth (u rieh heiress), 1st da. and coheir of James (Maxwell), Eari. of Dihletoin [S.J, by Elizabeth de Bolssotne, his wife, was cr., 31 March 1639, EARL OK LANER1CK [i.e., LANAlUvJ, LOKD MACHAKRTRE^) AND POLMONT [S.], with lem. to his heirs male succeeding to his estates. He was M.P. for Portsmouth, 1640 ; P.C. [E. and SJ; Sec. of State [S.], 1610-19 ; became a Covenanter, 1644 ; was a Commissioner from the Pari. [S.] to the King, 1647, and whs, in 1648, in command for the King in Scotland. He sue. to the Dukedom, Sq. [S ], and to the Earldom of Cambridge, ttc. [E.], 9 March 164S/9 in which year he joined the young King at the Hague. He was el. K.G., 12 Jan. 1649/50, but was never installed. () He resigned his titles and estates, 19 March 1650, into the bauds of the King at the Hague. It is probable that he either received a rcijranl ( c ) thereof, or was held not to have validly resigned them. P.C, 1650, in which year he accompanied the King into Scotland, being Lieut. Oeu. in the Scotch army 1651. He was mortally wounded (at the head of his troop) at the battle of Worcester, 3 and i(. 12 Sep. 1651, aged 34, and was 6«r. in Worcester Cathedral. (") Will dat. 2S May 1650, pr. at Edinburgh 28 Vrumlunrig, &c, no notice is taken of the former Earldom and Viseouutey (thus, as it were, advanced a grade higher), and so also when in 16S4, the said Marquess of Queosberry was made Duke of Quecnsberry, no notice i» taken of the Marquessate and Earldom of Quecnsberry, tho* the Earldom of Drumlaurig, the Viseouutey of IS'ith, and other titles (not of the name of Quri,. sherry) previously vested in the grantee are all duly Bet forth, The fact of the owner of all these dignities having resigned all his titles (obtaiuinga narodumus thereof in 1706) save thoseof Marquess and Earl of Queensberry[le being Duke of Qmcnsbcrry] of Viscount of Drumlanriy [he being Earl of Drumlam ig] and of Lord Douglas of Hawick and 'fibbers [lie being Lord Douglas of Kinmouth, Middlebie, and Dornock] seems to indicate that he (erroneously; considered these non resigned titles either to be merged (as it were) in the titles of the same designation, or else to be bound to follow their devolution. Such, however, was not the case, and it was by the omission of the Marquessate, &c, in such resignation (whether for the cause above suggested, or whether of fixed purpose so as to benefit the rightful, tho' distant, heir) that in 1801 these (non-resigned) titles devolved on the heir male of the grantee. (») With respect to the orthography Mr. J. Balfour Paul, Lyon, writes, " Machan- syre is quite correct, so is Machanshire ; the former is perhaps the old form, but they both occur." (b) The riband and George were sent to him, as also to the Marquess of Newcastle (elected at the same time) in Holland, " Garters not being to be procured." See " Bcllz," p. cxc. ( c ) There is, apparently, no proof of any regrant of the honours so resigned, till 15 June 1661, yet the resigner appears (notwithstanding) to have been considered in possession of his peerages at his death (in 1651) when, apparently, they devolved according to their respective limitations just as i) no such resignation had been made. These dignities are accordingly treated of, in the text, as having so devolved. (<*) Lord Clarendon, in comparing thisDuke with his brother, says of him that " lie was in all respects to he much preferred before the other ; a much wiser, tho' it may be, a less cunning man ; for he did not affect dissimulation, which was the other's masterpiece. He had unquestionable courage," " which (observes hi* Loz'dship elsewhere) the other did not abound in." See also Burnet's " Dukes of Hamilton."