Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

10 articles on this Page






"■=========== ; OUR MISCELLANY.…




TRE BREADALBANE TITLE AND ESTATES. The earldom of Breadalbane, and extensive estates of the late marquis, including Tarmouth Castle and others, of the annual value of upwards of R70,000 a year, are now the subject of litigation in the House of Lords. Since the death of the late marquis three claimants have appeared for the title and estates, and their respective claims are now the subject of litiga- tion, not only here, but before the Court in Scotland. The first claimant is Donald Campbell, Esq., formerly a lieutenant in the 57th regiment, whose petition to the Queen was a few days ago referred by her Ma- jesty's Attorney-General to the Committee of Privi- leges of the House of Lords. Lieut. Campbell claims to be descended from John, the eldest son of the first Earl of Breadalbane. John A. G. Campbell, of Glen- fallock. D.L., and J.P. for Perthshire, claims not as i f J.T. U,,4. «~ 11 ° descended rrom wie ,,¡,on, uu.u »» a. collateral descen- dant. This, claim Mr. J. A. G. Campbell's cousin, Lieut. Charles Wm. Campbell, of the 19th Bengal Cavalr.),, disputes, on the ground that his uncle, the grand- father of Mr. J. A. G. Campbell, was not lawfully married, or rather that, at the time of Elizabeth M. Blanohard s marriage to Mr. Campbell, in 1782, her former husband, Christopher Ludlow, was living1 Mr. Ludlow was a medical man at Sodbury, and on Mrs. Ludlow eloping with Captain Campbell, her husband was so distressed that he removed to America, and died in 1784., two years after the alleged marriage to Captain Campbell. The counsel retained by the various prtles are the Attorney-General, the Lord Advocate of Scotland, tho Solicitor-General of Scot land, bir Hugh Cairns, Mr. Rolt, Q.C., Mr. James Anderson, Q.C., Mr. Downing Bruce, Mr. G. Pafcton, Mr. J. Adam, and Mr. Dun das Grant. In 1861 Sir John Campbell was created Earl of Breadalbane with a special remainder to which of his sons he should nominate to succeed him, whose issue failing, to the heirs male of his body, which failing, to his nearest legitimate heirs male. The earl died in 1716 having had issue three sons, Duncan, the eldest (ancestor of Lieut. Donald Campbell) John, second son, whom his father nominated as his successor in the earldom and estates, in consideration of John having agreed to pay certain debts of the family. John, the third earl, and grandson of the first earl, died im 1782, when, according to the limitation in the original patent, the estates and title ought to have reverted to Duncan, the eldest son, or his male repre- sentatives. At this period, however, the descendant of Duncan was under Bome disability in conse- quence of having taken part in the troubles of those days, and waa, it is stated, absent from Scotland. No act of attainder, however, appears to have been passed. The next heir male, however, a descendant of an uncle of the first earl, in the absence of the descendants of Dancan, took up the title, and obtained possession of the estates. The third earl had carefully provided for the descendants of Duncan turning up, for, in a deed of entail executed by him, he alludes to the fact that some of them may have been overlooked or omitted, and that by the en- tail he was then creating, the honours and estates might be separated, which was contrary to the spirit and meaning of the entail of 1701, and of the en- tail he was then creating; and he specially provided that the-party who made good his title to the earldom in court of law, the same person should be entitled to the estates. John, the fourth earl, died in 1834, haying first obtained a new patent as a baron of the United Kingdom, and also a marquis ate in 1831. Ou the death of the late marquis, in 1862, the present claims were made, and will probably bo the subject of litigation for some time.


[No title]