Page:The Complete Peerage Ed 1 Vol 1.djvu/269

 BARNEWALL — BARKETT. 247 YI. 1S00 6, Matthew (Barnewall), Viscount Barxewall of or Kinosi.axd and B.UioN OF Ti itvr.Y [I.], cousin and h. male, being yst. but only siirv, s. and b. of Matthew B. of Stoney Batter iu Dublin, j. 0 by Anne, da. of Thomas lie Can, hi.s .second wife, which Matthew 1 S'i 1 (who d. 1773) was .s. and h. <jf Nicholas B. of Woodpark, co. Meath (rf. 1 735), who was s. and h. of Hon. Francis B. of Woodpark afsd. and of Begfiirtown, co. Meat)), who was 1th but 2nd BUry. s. of the 1st Viscount and who </. 1097. He was b. in Dublin and is said to have been iu a very humble position.!*) His claim to the Peerage was allowed! 1 ') in 1811, and he subsequently received a small pension. He M. lirstly, in early life, a lady who d. leaving a son who was living 1816, but who il. unm. v.p. He in. secondly Mary Anne, 1st da. of John UiunsiiAW of Cork. She d. s.p. He m. thirdly, 2 .'an. 1820, Julia, da. of John Wn.us of Walc.it Place, Lambeth, Surrey. He d. s.p. 15 Nov, 1884, at Walcnt place, when the Peerage became vr/wct.!") His widow was living 1881. aged 75, having been, since 1S75, a Pensioner of the " Universal Ueueficent Hocictv," Soho s.p, Midi. BAROXS'lWX. Sir " Suxderlis of Baroxstowx, go. Westmeath," Baron [I.], a: 1797, ex. 1816. l'.ARREFORE. See '• Carixgtox of Bajuiefoiie or Burford in Connaught," Viscount [1.1 ». 1613, ex. 1706. HARRELLS. i.e. " Viscount Babhkli-s," See " Catherlough," Earl of [I.], er. 17G2, ex. 1772. BARRETT OF NEWBURGII. Baron [s.] ]. Sir Edward Baebett of Belhouse, Or Belhus, in the L 1C27 parish of Aveley, Essex, s. and h. of Charles B. (who d. v.p. 1581), by • ^ ' Christian, da. of Sir Walter Mjldmay, 6. about 1580, sue his 1 C IX <~ grandfather Edward Barrett at Belhus, 1586 ; Knighted by James 1 ; lu-H-O. Ambassador to France, 1625 ; was er, (to him and the heirs male of his body), 17 Oct. 1627, LORD BARRETT OF NEWBURGH, co. Fife [S.] ; P.C. and Chancellor of the Exchequer, 1623, and subsequently Chancellor (*) See an amusing account of him iu Sir B. Burke's " Vicissitudes," 3rd series, 1863 l'l'- 16-21. ( b ) His claim was opposed by Thomas Barnewall, who stated that he was h. male of the body of Christopher B., alleged to have been the 2nd s. of Henry, the 2nd Viscount. This Christopher, however, who was b. 22 Feb. 1680 appears to have d. young — no mention of him being made in the family settlement of 21 July 1698. ( c ) In 1835 a petition claiming this title was presented by Thomas Barnewall, Capt, in the Longford militia s. and h. of Christopher B. who was s. and h. of George B. both of Wimbledon, co. Dublin, which George was s. and h. of Col. James B., alleged to have been the 6th and yst. s. of the 1st Viscount. This James was in fact son in law of the 1st Viscount, bemg the 2nd husband of his da. JIabel, Countess of EiOgall, No further proceedings were taken iu this matter. In the two deeds of settlement of the estates us the heirs male of the Barnewall family, dat. 31 Dec. 1661 _ 21 July 169S, no mention is made of such a 6th s. (James) or of his issue, who r existed) would doubtless have been placed in remainder before the very ranches of the Barnewall family mentioned therein.