Page:The Complete Peerage Ed 1 Vol 4.djvu/26

 24 GLAMORGAN. GLAMORGAN. [Hum Lis Pespenckr (junior), Lord Lb Despbnokk (1314-26), obtained, in right of his wife, nearly the whole county of Glamorgan and m nocord- ingly sometime" spokeu of as " LOUD OK GLAMORGAN." See vol hi, p. 91, tub "Desi'bncer."] Earldom. Edward Somerset, h. 1601, riffled [since 1628], Lord I 1641 ? Herbert (being s. and h. ap. of Henry, "ith Earl and 1st M.VRQUESS OV Worcester), was, possibly, at some date, between Hi April itHQ /«'i. nn u n t,.!.] *> r / //-../ i, v.,„ , , r /.,.t,„„ 16G7. 1013 (when he is styled "Lord Herbert"') and 18 Nov. 1615 (when, and frequently afterwards, he is styled " Earl »/' Glamorgan ") cr. EARL OF GLAMORGAN. It is stated in Sandford's " Genealogical History'' that there is "now remaining in the signet office at Whitehall a hill under the Royal sign manual at Oxford (if a paten t( a ) did not thereupon pass the greo) seal) in order into his creation into the honours of HAUL OK (J LAM 0 110 AN and BARON BEAUFORT OF CALDECOT CASTLE, eo. Monmouth." No such bill, however, can now [18901 be discovered. In a most extraordinary, utterly illegal and "now discredited "('') commission, proteasing to be dated 1 April I'll I, addressed to him as " Kdward .Somerset, alio* Plantagenet. Lord HERBERT. BARON BEAUFORT OF CALDICOTE, OUISMOND [i.e., GROSMOND). CHEPSTOW, RAGLAND and GOWER" making him "our Generalissimo," giving him several patents from a Marquis to a Baronet to dispose of," " with promise of our dear da. Elizabeth to your son, Plantagenet, in marriage with £300,000 in dower," also "the title of DUKE OF SOMERSET to you and your heirs male for ever," as also "the Garter," &c.( c ) In Dec. 1610, he sue. his father as (2d) Mar«(I'K3s of Worcester, &c. In consequence of a motion made in the House of Lords after the Restoration, to the effect that this Patent of 1644, was deemed "in prejudice to the Peers," the Marquess of Worcester stated " that a Patent was made and left in his hands by the King to create him Duke of Somerset upon certain conditions that had not been performed, and that he was ready to deliver it up ; this statement was made on 23 Aug. 1600, and on 3 Sep. following it was stated in the House that it had beeu given up.('') Although the Marquess thus resigned his claim upon the Dukedom of Somerset(°) he was nevertheless considered to be ( a ) See an article (of considerable interest) by J. Horace Bound in " The Academy " for 8 Dec. 1883 (No. 60. r i) entitled "The true history of the Somerset patent, 1 0-14, " as also an article (therein referred to) on the " Earldom of Qhunorgan, by C. O. Y." [Sir C. G. Young, Garter], in the " Coll. Top. ct Gen." (vol. vii, pp. IflO-100.) ( b ) See Mr. Round's article (as in note "a") where it is forcibly remarked that " this document appears to have been unheard of for 16 years " after its date, while "none of its provisions were acted upon ; the Earl did not receive the Dukedom of Somerset; was not made generalissimo ; did not attempt to create titles of honour," was never recognised as K.G. (tbo' he lived seven years after the Restoration), &c. The document itself was " received with incredulity by [King] Charlesand by Clarendon— its outrageous character and its mysterious origin raised such a storm of protest among the Peers, that the too-ingenious Marquis, soon discovering that he baa overshot the mark, was glad enough to escape with impunity, by withdrawing it in all baste.' 1 236. (<i) This probably accounts for the statement in Deatson's " Political Index " |1806] that the dignities of the Earldom of Glamorgan and Barony of Beaufort were unci lied in 1660. It is remarkable that Dugdale takes no notice whatever of this creation, while as to the patent of April 1641, he speaks of it as one " in troth suspected to be forged." («) The Dukedom of Somerset [which title he coveted as being an illegit. descendant of Henry (Beaufort), Duke of Somerset, himself an illegit. (tho' legitimated) descendant of John (Plantagenet^), Duke of Lancaster], was restored (as cr. 1547), in 1661 to William (Seymour), Marquess of Hertford, who (writes Dugdale) was prepared to make such objections" against the alleged grant thereof in 1646," as " might have tended much to the dishonour of my Lord of Worcester." t Hence his style of "Somerset alias Plantagenet " iu the document he produced.
 * =) The whole of this remarkable document is printed in " Collins," vol. i, pp. 231-