Mr. Hodgson stated, That this Evidence should be produced upon a future Occasion, Led Inchiquin. and that he would now proceed to prove the Birth of the Claimant. H. S. Smith, Esq. (Mr. Hodgson to Lord Inchiquin.) Do you produce an examined Extract from the 30th July 1861. Register of Baptisms of the Parish of Kilnasoola in the County of Clare? I do (producing the same). Did you compare it with the original Book? I copied it from the Book. And it is a true Copy? It is a true Copy. The same was read as follows: Dec 7, 1800. (Baptised) Lucius, Son of Edward O'Brien, Bart, and Charlotte Lady No. 62. O'Brien, his Wife. The Counsel were informed, That the Committee were of opinion that this original Register also should be produced. Mr. Hodgson stated, That it should be produced on a future Occasion. Mr. Hodgson further stated, That he would just prove that the Royal Assent was given to the Act of the Irish Parliament of the Third Year of George the Third, which had been put in Evidence. (Mr. Hodgson to Mr. Smith.) Do you produce the Journals of the House of Lords of the Irish Parliament for the Year 1764? I do (producing the same). Will you turn to the 12th May 1764, and read the Entry which you find there? The same was read as follows: Die Sabbati, 12o Maij 1764. The House was adjourned during Pleasure, to robe. Lord Lieutenant present. his Excellency Hugh Earl of Northumberland, Lord Lieutenant, General, and General Governor of Ireland, being arrayed in Royal Robes, entered the House with the usual Ceremonies of Grandure; the Earl of Drogheda carrying the Sword of State, and the Earl of Cavan the Cap of Maintenance; Two Noblemen's Sons bearing the Train of the Royal Robe. His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, making his Congé to the Throne, ascended the same, and seated himself in the Chair of State, under the Canopy, all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal standing robed in their Places, uncovered, till their Lordships took their Seats. Commons sent for. The Lord Chancellor, kneeling, conferred with his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, and then, standing on the Right Hand of the Chair of State, commanded the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod to repair to the House of Commons, and acquaint them that it is his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant's Pleasure they attend him immediately in the House of Peers. They enter. And the Commons being come, they, with their Speaker, were conducted Then the Clerk of the Crown read the Titles of the Bills to be passed; viz. (Among others) * 39. An Act for confirming certain Agreements between Sir Edward O'Brien, Bart., and Lucius O'Brien, Esq., his eldest Son and Heir Apparent, and for the more effectual Security and immediate Payment of the Debts of the said Sir Edward O'Brien, and for providing Portions for the said Sir Edward's younger Children, and for other Purposes. * * To these Bills the Clerk of the Parliaments pronounced the Royal Assent, severally, in these Words, viz., "Soit fait comme il est desiré." No. 63. R. O'Brien, 30th July 1861. Then ROBERT O'BRIEN Esquire was called in; and having been sworn, was examined as follows: 2. Die Veneris, 11° Aprilis 1862. The LORD CRANWORTH in the Chair. THE Order of Adjournment was read. The Minutes of the last Committee were read. The Counsel and Parties were ordered to be called in: And Mr. Sergeant Burke and Mr. J. H. Hodgson appearing as Counsel for the Petitioner ; Mr. Hodgson stated, That he proposed first to produce additional Evidence to prove the Extinction of the Descendants of the eldest Son of the First Lord Inchiquin. Then ANNE, DOWAGER MARCHIONESS OF THOMOND, having been sworn at the Table by the Lord Chancellor, was examined as follows: (Mr. Hodgson.) I believe you are the Widow of James the Third Marquess of Thomond? Yes. Did your Husband die in the Year 1855? Yes; the 3d of July. Did he leave any Children? No. Are you acquainted with the Claimant Sir Lucius O'Brien, who claims to be the Baron of Inchiquin? I am. Have you heard your late Husband say anything upon the Subject as to who would succeed to the Barony of Inchiquin in the event of his dying? Sir Lucius O'Brien. Sir Lucius O'Brien, the present Claimant? Yes. Were you acquainted with William the Second Marquess? (Lord Chancellor.) I understood you to say that the late Marquess never had any Child? Mr Hodgson stated, That upon the former Hearing of this Case the Committee had directed the Attention of the Petitioner's Counsel to Nos. 13, 17, 18, and 22 upon the printed Pedigree; and that he proposed now to produce fuller Evidence with respect to each of those Numbers, beginning with No. 13, Henry, 2nd Brother of Murrough 6th Lord Inchiquin. (c.) S Then Evidence on Ireland. Marchioness of Thomond. 11th April 1862. R. O'Brien, 11th April 1862. No. 64. No. 65. Sir J. B. Burke, Ulster Kingof-Arms. Then ROBERT O'BRIEN Esquire was called in; and having been sworn, was examined as follows: (Mr. Hodgson.) Do you produce a certified examined Copy of the Entry relating to the Burial of Colonel Henry Braine? I do (producing the same). Have you examined it with the original Register of the Parish of Christchurch in the City of Cork? I have. Will you read it? The same was read as follows: Collonel Henry Braine desesed and was buried the seventh of Desember 1645. Mr. Hodgson stated, That it would appear from other Entries that "Braine" was The Counsel was asked whether he had any Evidence to connect the Lords of Inchiquin with this particular Parish. (Lord Monteagle of Brandon to the Witness.) Was Lord Inchiquin Lord President of Munster at that Time? Yes. And Cork was within his Jurisdiction as such? Yes. (Mr. Hodgson.) Have you a Copy of several Entries in the Register of the Parish Church of Christchurch in the City of Cork which you compared with the original Register, and can state to be a correct Copy? I have (producing the same). Will you read those Entries? The same was read as follows: Margret the daughter of Moragh OBraine Lord Baron of Insequin Lord President of Munster was baptiz'd the 9 day of Septe₺ 1645. Elinor Braine daughter to my Lorde of Insiquine desesed and was buried the ii of March 1644. Collonel Henry Braine desesed and was buried the seventh of Desember 1645. Margret the daughter of Moragh OBraine Lord President of Moonster decesed and was buried the 26 of March 1647. Mr. Hodgson stated, That he would proceed next to offer additional Evidence with respect to No. 17., Charles, Second Son of Murrough First Earl of Inchiquin; and that he would first produce a Funeral Entry contained in a Book preserved in the Office of Ulster King-at-Arms. Then Sir JOHN BERNARD BURKE, Ulster King-of-Arms, was called in; and having been sworn, was examined as follows: (Mr. Hodgson.) I believe you are Ulster King-of-Arms. I am. Is your Office at the Tower of Dublin? Yes. Do Do you produce this Book (a Book being shown to the Witness)? Was that Book among other Books which you received upon being appointed to your Office? It was. Is that one of the Records of the Office? Are you prepared to state upon what Authority the Funeral Entries contained in that Book were made by your Predecessor? I think I can. I consider that the Duty of making Funeral Entries is Part and Parcel of the Ulster King-of-Arms' Duty. In the Time of Queen Elizabeth, the Earl Marshal of England issued a Decree authorizing the English Kings-of-Arms to continue to make these Entries; and I believe a similar Decree was then issued by Sir William Fitzwilliam, who was then Deputy of Ireland, and that from the Date of that Decree the Entries were made in the Office of Ulster King-of-Arms by the Officer who attended at the Funerals. In consequence of the great Destruction of Irish Records, particularly in the Year 1641 and subsequently, it is almost impossible to produce in many Cases those original Decrees; but I have found, in looking through the Archives in my Office, a Petition from William Preston, who was my Predecessor as Ulster King-of-Arms in the Time of Charles the First, in which he petitions the then Lord Deputy Wentworth, as setting forth the Fact that a Decree had been made by the Lord Deputy Fitzwilliam in connection with the Decree made by the Earl Marshal of England in the Time of Queen Elizabeth, and that was admitted by the Lord Deputy. And these Funeral Entries begin in my Office from the Year 1590 or about that Time, just subsequently to the Period to which I am referring; and I consider that if I could find the original Decree of Sir William Fitzwilliam, which I have searched for in vain, it would carry out what I am stating. But, in addition to that, I will go the Length of saying, that the Ulster King-of-Arms was placed in a different position from the Garter King-of-Arms in England. He (Garter) acts altogether under the Warrant of the Earl Marshal of England; in every Grant of Arms he acts by virtue of the Warrant of the Earl Marshal. No so in Ireland. There the Ulster King-of-Arms acts at once by Authority from the Crown. I derive my Patent from no intermediate Authority. I grant Arms under that Patent which I receive from the Crown; and I go the Length of considering that the Funeral Entries in Ireland, even if they were not supported by the Decree to which I allude, would have had sufficient Authority as coming from Ulster King-of-Arms, who was at the Head of the Heraldic Department of Ireland, as the Earl Marshal is at the Head of the Heraldic Department in England. (Lord Chancellor.) Did the Decree in the Time of Queen Elizabeth of which you speak direct Funeral Entries to be made of all the Members of a Peer's Family? No. I cannot tell to what extent the Decree goes. I have brought the Petition with me, in case your Lordships wish to see it. You spoke of a Petition in Charles the First's Time to Lord Wentworth; does that define the Extent of the Authority which was desired to be given to Ulster King-of-Arms? No. If your Lordship will allow me, I will read it. From what is it that you draw your Conclusion that it was the Duty of Ulster King-of-Arms to make Funeral Entries of the collateral Members of a Peer's Family? Not only of a Peer's Family, but of any one at whose Funeral he and other Heraldic Officers attended in their official Capacity. Is that the Practice in England? Yes, I fancy it is. I have found Funeral Entries, not only of Peers, but of others. I only speak from my Remembrance of the Fact. I have no Doubt that it is they were not confined absolutely to Peerage Families only. so; that Has there been any Rule or Practice that Ulster King-of-Arms should attend the Funerals of collateral Members of a Peer's Family? Sir J. B. Burke, Ulster Kingof-Arms. 11th April 1862 I can only deduce my Conclusion from continuous Entries in Funeral Certificates of Persons who were not actual Members of a Peer's Family at whose Funeral Ulster Kingof-Arms did attend, Time after Time, and Year after Year, from which I infer that there was no Restriction upon him as to the exact Persons whose Funerals he attended. |