|
|
Complete Baronetage.
[volume 1, page 82]
- TEMPLE
- cr. 24 Sep. 1611(82a) ; sometime, 1714–18, Baron Cobham, and afterwards, 1718–49, Viscount Cobham ; dormant, 15 Nov. 1786 ; though assumed ever since that date.
I. 1611.
“ Sir Thomas Temple,(82b) of Stowe, co. Buckingham, Knt.”(82a) 1st s. and h. of John Temple,(82c) of Stowe aforesaid (who purchased that manor in 1590, and d. 9 May 1603, aged 61), and of Burton Dassett, co. Warwick, by Susan, da. and h. of Thomas Spencer, of Everdon, co. Northampton, was bap. 9 Jan. 1566/7 ; matric. at Oxford (Univ. Coll.), 22 June 1582, aged 16 ; admitted to Lincoln's Inn, 1583 ; M.P. for Andover, 1588–89 ; suc. his father 9 May 1603 ; was Knighted, shortly afterwards, July 1603, at Salden, Bucks, and was cr. a Bart., as above, 24 Sep. 1611(82a) ; Sheriff of Oxon, 1606–07 ; of Bucks, 1616–17 ; and of Warwickshire, 1620–21. He m., about 1595, Hester, da. of Miles Sandys, of Latimers, and of Eton, Bucks, Master of the King's Bench office, by Hester, da. of William Clifton, of Brimpton, co. Somerset. He was living Feb. 1632, but d. before March 1636/7, at Burton Dasset, and was bur. there. Will dat. 4 Feb. 1632, pr. 13 March 1636/7. His widow d. 1656.(82d)
II. 1636 ?
Sir Peter Temple, Bart. [1611], of Stowe aforesaid, 1st s. and h., bap. 10 Oct. 1592, at Stowe ; suc. to the Baronetcy about 1636 ; Sheriff of Bucks, 1634–5 ; M.P. for Buckingham, April to May 1640, and 1640–53.(82e) He m. firstly, 5 July 1614, at Paulerspury, co. Northampton, Ann, 2d da. and h. of Sir Arthur Throckmorton, of Paulerspury, by Ann, da. of Thomas Lucas, of Colchester. She d. s.p.m.,(82f) and was bur. 23 Jan. 1619/20, at Stowe. He m. secondly, 20 May 1630, at Kensington, Christian, da. and coheir of Sir John Leveson, of Haling, co. Kent, and Lilleshall, co. Stafford, by Frances, da. and h. of Sir Thomas Sondes, of Throwley, co. Kent. He was bur. 12 Sep. 1653, at Stowe. Admon. 6 Jan. 1653/4, to a creditor. His widow was bur. at Stowe, 3 April 1655. [page 83]
III. 1653.
Sir Richard Temple, Bart. [1611], of Stowe aforesaid, only s. and h., by 2d wife, b. 1634 ; admitted to Gray's Inn, 6 Nov. 1648 ; suc. to the Baronetcy in Sep. 1653 ; M.P. for Warwickshire, 1654–55 ; for Buckingham, 1659 ; and for Bucks, 1660 till his death, having been made K.B. at the coronation of Charles II in 1661, and taking a leading part against the Popish plot, and for the exclusion of James, Duke of York, from the Crown ; one of the Council for foreign plantations, 1671, and a Commissioner of Customs, 1672–94.(83a) He m., in or before 1675, Mary, da. and coheir of Henry Knapp, of Weston, co. Oxford. He was bur. at Stowe, 12 May 1697. Will pr. 1697. His widow was bur. there, 15 May 1726. Will pr. 1727.
IV. 1697.
Sir Richard Temple, Bart. [1611], of Stowe aforesaid, s. and h., b. 24 Oct. and bap. 1 Nov. 1675, at St. Paul's, Covent Garden ; entered the Army in 1685, and distinguished himself at the at the siege of Lille in 1708, becoming, subsequently (1742), Field Marshal ; suc. to the Baronetcy in May 1697 ; was M.P. for Buckingham (five Parls.), 1697–1704 ; for Bucks, 1704–08, and for Buckingham (again), 1708–13 ; Envoy to Vienna, 1714–15. He was cr., 19 Oct. 1714, BARON COBHAM(83b) of Cobham, co. Kent, being subsequently, 23 May 1718, cr., BARON AND VISCOUNT COBHAM(83c) of Cobham, co. Kent, with (in this case), a spec. rem. failing his issue male, in favour of two of his sisters ; P.C., 1716 ; Gov. of Jersey, 1723–49. He m. Anne, da. of Edmund Halsey, of Stoke Pogis, Bucks, and of Southwark, Surrey, Brewer. He d. s.p. 13 and was bur. 18 Sep. 1749, at Stowe, when the Barony of Cobham, created 1714, became extinct, but the Barony and Viscountcy of Cobham, created 1718, devolved on his sister(83c) (according to the spec. rem. in its creation), as did also the estate of Stowe and the other estates of the Temple family, while the Baronetcy devolved on his cousin and heir male, as below. His widow d. 20 March 1760. For fuller particulars of him and his wife, see “ Peerage.”
V. 1749.
Sir William Temple, Bart. [1611], of Nash House in Kempsey, co. Worcester, cousin and h. male, being 1st s. and h. of William Temple, of Lillingston Dayrell, Bucks, by Mary, da. of (—) Green, of co. Kent, which William last named (who was bur. at Buckingham, 27 Aug. 1706), was 5th and yst. s. of Sir Peter Temple, of Stanton Bury, Bucks, which Peter (who was b. 1613 ; Knighted 6 June 1641, and bur. at St. Peter's, Mancroft, Norwich, 14 Jan. 1659/60), was 1st s. and h.(83d) of Sir John Temple, of [page 84] Stanton Bury aforesaid (by his 1st wife, Dorothy, da. and coheir of Edmund Lee, of Stanton aforesaid), which John (who was Knighted 21 March 1612/3, in his 20th year, and d. 23 Sep. 1632), was 2d s. of the 1st Baronet. He was b. April 1694 ; suc. his father in Aug. 1706 ; was sometime of Buckingham and of North Crawley ; purchased, about 1738, the estate of Nash House abovenamed, and suc. to the Baronetcy 15 Sep. 1749, on the death of his cousin, Viscount Cobham. He m. firstly, May 1718, Elizabeth, da. and h. of Peter Paxton, M.D., of Buckingham, by Elizabeth, his wife. She d. 1729, and was bur. at Martin Hussentree, co. Warwick. He m. secondly, Nov. 1731, Elizabeth, da. of Hugh Ethersey, of Leckhampstead, Bucks. He d. s.p.m.s.(84a) 1760, aged 66, and was bur. at Kempsey. M.I. His widow d. 2 Dec. 1762, aged 67, and was bur. there.
VI. 1760.
Sir Peter Temple, Bart. [1611], br. and h. male, sometime of Buckingham, but afterwards of Draycot, co. Oxford, suc. to the Baronetcy, 7 April 1760. He m. firstly, 1719, Elizabeth Broughton, of Longdon, co. Stafford. She d. 1726. He m. secondly, 1729, Elizabeth, da. of John Mold, of Charlton, Oxon. She d. June 1759, and was bur. at Draycot. He d. (within a year of his succession to the title), 15 Nov. 1761, and was bur. at Draycot. Will pr. 1761.
VII. 1761, to 1786.
Sir Richard Temple, Bart. [1611], of Nash House, in Kempsey aforesaid, only surv. s. and h., by 2d wife, (84b) b. 1 June 1731 ; suc. to the Baronetcy, 15 Nov. 1761 ; a Commissioner of the Navy, 1761 ; Comptroller of Excise, 1763–86. He m., 24 June 1758, [page 85] at Kempsey aforesaid, Anna Sophia, yst. da. and coheir of his uncle, Sir William Temple, 5th Bart. [1611], by his 2d wife, Elizabeth, da. of Hugh Ethersey. He d. s.p.s. at Bath, 15 and was bur. 20 Nov. 1786, at Bath Abbey, aged 55. Will pr. Nov. 1786. His widow d. 4 Oct. 1805, and was bur. at Kensington. Will pr. 1805. At his death the Baronetcy became dormant ; the heir male of the body of the grantee (for such heir undoubtedly existed), not assuming it.(85a) It was, however, assumed as under.
VIII. 1786.
“ Sir John Temple, Bart.,” assumed the dignity of a Baronet [1611] in Nov. 1786 (being at that date Consul Gen. of New York), as heir male of the body of the grantee.
Various descents are assigned to him. [I] A memorandum in his own handwriting gives his descent from Sir Peter Temple, the 2d Bart., as being “ the son of Robert, eldest son of Thomas, the son of Purbeck, who was 2d son of the aforementioned Sir Peter Temple, Bart.,(85b) of Stowe.” He is accordingly “ stated in editions of the Baronetage, published before 1828, to have descended from the second Baronet. This [however] could not have been the fact, or his branch would have inherited the dignity [in 1749] before those of Stanton Bury [whose descent was from a younger brother of the said 2d Bart.] Other lines of descent have, subsequently, been suggested for him, but none has been actually ascertained ” [Her. and Gen., iii, 396]. [II] A conjecture in Debrett's Baronetage, of 1835 (edited by W. Courthope), that the descent might be from Col. Edmund Temple (one of the sons of Sir John Temple, 2d son of the 1st Bart.), is, in Burke's Baronetage (1841), adopted as a certainty, though the precise descent is not given.(85c) [III] An American genealogist makes the said John to be son of Robert, son of Thomas, son of Sir Purbeck Temple, a younger son of Sir John Temple, of Stanton Bury, the 2d son of the 1st Bart. [New England Hist. and Gen. Reg., vol. x]. It is, however, quite certain that the said Sir Purbeck died without issue. [IV] The descent (as in Burke's Peerage, 1899) is from the Rev. Thomas Temple, D.C.L. [1633], said (therein) to be Rector of Bourton on the Water, co. Gloucester,(85d) which Thomas, who was bap. 8 April 1604, at Stowe, was 3d son of the 1st Bart. This Thomas is stated to have had “ a grandson ” [the child's parentage, a most important part in the pedigree, is apparently unknown], named Thomas [page 86] Temple, who resided in Ireland, and who, by the sister of Nathaniel White, was father of Robert Temple, of Boston in America (b. 1694), who was father of John, who, in 1786, assumed the [1611] Baronetcy. As to these last two named descents, neither of them would, even if genuine, justify John Temple in assuming the Baronetcy while issue male remained, which it undoubtedly did till 1796, of Col. Edmund Temple, elder brother of Sir Purbeck Temple, and a descendant of the second son of the 1st Baronet.
JOHN TEMPLE, who (as abovestated) assumed the Baronetcy in 1786 was, undoubtedly, 3d son, and (after 1781), heir male of Robert Temple, of Boston, in New England, “ descended from Ireland,”(86a) by Mehitabel (m. 11 Aug. 1721), da. of John Nelson, of Boston aforesaid, which John Nelson was “ executor of the will of his uncle, Sir Thomas(86b) Temple,”(86a) being s. of Robert Nelson, of Gray's Inn, Midx., by Mary, 3d da. of Sir John Temple (ancestor of the 5th, 6th and 7th Barts.), 2d s. of Sir Thomas Temple the 1st Bart. His maternal descent from that Baronet is, therefore, undoubted, and the cousinship thus existing with the Temple Baronets may have given rise to the idea that it was one, in the male line, through Temple, instead of one in the female line, through Nelson. His paternal lineage, however, is, even if allowed as far as his grandfather, altogether conjectural beyond that period. His father, “ Capt. Robert Temple,” b. 1694, emigrated from the north of Ireland to Boston, in New England, in Sep. 1717, and d. 14 April 1754, at Charlestown, aged 60, being, probably, son of a Thomas Temple, who d. in Ireland, by [—], da. of [—] White,(86c) in Ireland, the parentage of the said Thomas Temple (said to have been a ship's carpenter), being unproved.(86d) He himself, the second s.(86e) of his parents, was b. at Noddle's island (afterwards East Boston), and bap. 16 April 1732, at Boston aforesaid ; was Surveyor Gen. of the Customs in the Northern District of America, 1761–67 ; a Commissr. of Revenue, 1767–74 ; Lieut. Gov. of New Hampshire, 1768–74, and Consul General for Great Britain in America, 1786–98, being the first so appointed after the declaration of the independence. He m. 20 Jan. 1767, Elizabeth, da. of James Bowdoin, Gov. of the State of Massachusetts. He d. in the city of New York, 17 Nov. 1798, aged 67, and was bur. in St. Paul's church there. M.I. Will pr. Feb. 1799.
IX. 1798.
Sir Grenville Temple, Bart.(86f) [1611], s. and h. b. 16 Oct. 1768 ; suc. his father, and assumed the Baronetcy, 17 Nov. 1798. He m., firstly, 20 March 1797, Elizabeth, da. of Col. George Watson, of Boston aforesaid. She d. 4 Nov. 1809, He m. secondly, 9 June 1812, Maria Augusta Dorothea, widow of Col. Frederick Manners, da. of Sir [page 87] Thomas Rumbold, 1st Bart. [1779], by his 2d wife, Joanna, da. of Edmund Law, Bishop of Carlisle. He d. 18 Feb. 1829, at Florence, aged 60. Will pr. Feb. 1830. His widow, by whom he had no issue, d. 14 Feb. 1852, at Tours, in France. Admon. June 1582.
X. 1829.
Sir Grenville Temple, Bart.(87a) [1611], s. and h. by 1st wife, b. 20 July 1799 ; an officer in the army, 15th Hussars, becoming Lieut. Col. in Nov. 1841 ; suc. his father, and assumed the Baronetcy, 18 Feb. 1829. He m. 5 May 1829, at Florence, Mary, da. of George Baring, by Harriet Rochfort, da. of Sir John Hadley D'Oyly, 6th Bart. [1663]. He d. very suddenly, 7 June 1847, aged 48, at Constance, in Switzerland. His widow d. there, 10 May 1863.
XI. 1847.
Sir Grenville Leofric Temple, Bart.(87a) [1611], s. and h., b. at Florence, 3 Feb. 1830 ; was sometime an officer in the Royal Navy ; suc. his father, and assumed the Baronetcy, 7 June 1847. He m. 22 July 1856, at Hermandstadt, Transylvania, Marie, 2d da. of (—) Aron van Bistren, or de Bistroy, Minister of Finance for Transylvania. He d. 3 March 1860, at Thulgarten, near Constance aforesaid. His widow d. at Constance, 12 June 1865.
XII. 1860.
Sir Grenville Louis John Temple, Bart.(87a) [1611], only s. and h., b. 5 Jan. 1858, at Chateau de Salenstein, Switzerland ; suc. his father, and assumed the Baronetcy, 3 March 1860 ; sometime Lieut. 20th Foot.
Family Estates.
Those of the first Baronets, including the princely seat at Stowe, in Bucks, passed, in 1749, on the death of Viscount Cobham, the 4th Bart., to the Grenville family. That of Kempsey, co. Worcester, purchased by the 5th Baronet, passed, in 1786 or 1805, to the family of Dicken (descendants and representatives in the female line of the said Baronet), who took the name of Temple, and acquired a Baronetcy in 1876.
Notes.
(82a) See p. 80, note “ a,” sub “ Napier.”
(82b) The family of Temple is ably dealt with in the Her. and Gen. (vol. iii, pp. 305–410, pp. 530–544, vol. iv, pp. 8–13, and vol. viii, pp. 510–514), where it is shewn that, notwithstanding their alleged descent in the male line from the Saxon Earls of Mercia (see Edmondson's Baronagium [vol. iii, p. 278], etc.), they “ did not rise above the rank of small gentry until the latter part of the fifteenth century,” and it was not till the seventeenth century that any member obtained the rank of knighthood.
(82c) His yr. br., Anthony Temple, of Coughton, co. Warwick, is said, but whether truly or not is very doubtful (see Nat. Biogr. under “ Temple, Sir William ”), to have been father of Sir William Temple, Provost of Trinity College, Dublin, (1609–1627), who undoubtedly, by his son Sir John Temple, Master of the Rolls in Ireland, (1640–1677), was grandfather of Sir William Temple, Bart. (so cr. 31 Jan. 1665), the celebrated Statesman, and of Sir John Temple, the father of Henry, 1st Viscount Palmerston [I.]
(82d) “ She had four sons and nine daughters, which lived to be married, and so exceedingly multiplied, that this lady saw 700 extracted from her body ” [Fuller's Worthies]. If this is true, she far exceeds Mrs. Honywood (d. 11 May 1620, aged 93), who had but 376 descendants at her death (see Top. and Gen., vol. i, pp. 397–411, and 568–576), but it should be noted that the Honywood case is well authenticated, whereas that of Temple rests merely on Dr. Fuller's statement.
(82e) He was, at first, a zealous partisan of the Parl., and was actually nominated one of the Judges for the King's trial, but he abstained from attendance thereat, and, after the King's execution, threw up his commission in the Army. He is often confused both (1) with his cousin, Peter Temple, one of the Regicide Judges (who, having signed the death warrant, was condemned to be hanged, 16 Oct. 1660, and died a prisoner, 20 Dec. 1663, aged 63), as also (2) with his nephew, Sir Peter Temple (Knt.), of Stanton Bury, Bucks, ancestor of the 5th, 6th, and 7th Baronets.
(82f) Ann, her only surv. child, bap. 26 Jan. 1619/20, m. Thomas (Roper), Viscount Baltinglass [I.], and d. in the Fleet prison, London, 1696.
(83a) This Sir Richard Temple rebuilt the house at Stowe, originally built by Peter Temple, temp. Eliz. Lord Cobham, son of Sir Richard, built a new front and added the wings, which front was again rebuilt in a more stately form by his nephew and successor, Earl Temple.
(83b) His connection with the family of Cobham was somewhat remote. His paternal grandmother, Christian, being 2nd da. and coheir of Sir John Leveson, by Frances, da. of Sir Thomas Sondes, and Margaret, his wife, sister, but not heir or coheir, of Henry (Brooke), Lord Cobham, attainted in 1603, whose nephew and representative, Sir William Brooke, K.B. (died in 1643), left issue.
(83c) Hester Grenville, widow of Richard Grenville, of Wootton, Bucks. She was cr. (a few days later), 14 Oct. 1749, Countess Temple, with rem. of that dignity to her issue male. This and her other peerage dignities continued in such issue, till, by the death s.p.m., 28 March 1889, of the Duke of Buckingham and Chandos, 5th in descent from her, and the last of her issue male, the Earldom of Temple (1749) became extinct, but the Barony and Viscountcy of Cobham (1718) passed (under the spec. rem. in its creation) to Baron Lyttelton of Frankley, heir male of the body of Dame Christian Lyttelton, the other sister of Richard (Temple), 1st Viscount Cobham, who was in remainder to that title. The 2d Duke of Buckingham and Chandos had, however, obtained an Earldom of Temple of Stowe, co. Buckingham, cr. 4 Feb. 1822, with a spec. rem., in fault of his issue male, to his daughter and her issue male. This rem. took effect on the death, abovementioned, of the 3d Duke in 1889, when William Stephen Gore-Langton, the son and heir of such daughter, became Earl Temple of Stowe (1822), though he neither inherited the estate of Stowe, nor in any way represented the family of Temple, of which (though a descendant), he was not even a junior coheir.
(83d) This Sir Peter Temple had three younger brothers, Thomas, Edmund and Purbeck, all under age and unm. at their father's death in 1632. (See his funeral certificate). Of these three (i) Sir Thomas Temple, bap. 10 Jan. 1614, was Gov. of [page 84] Acadia, or Nova Scotia, 1656–70, and was cr. a Bart. [S.], 7 July 1662. He d. unm. 27 March 1674, and was bur. at Ealing, Midx. The children of his br. Edmund are wrongly attributed to him in Le Neve's MS., Baronets, and in Nichols' Leicestershire. (ii) Sir Purbeck Temple, 4th and yst. br., was of Addiscombe, co. Surrey, Knighted 3 Sep. 1660, m., but d. s.p. Aug. 1695, and was bur. at Islington. He and his brother Edmund are mentioned as living in the will of their stepmother, Dame Frances Temple, dat. 3 Aug. 1642, and pr. 9 Aug. 1647. (iii) Edmund Temple, the 3d brother, bap. 6 June 1622, at Stowe ; was a Col. in the Parl. service, and was of Sulby Priory, in the parish of Welford, co. Northampton, where he was bur. 9 March 1667/8, naming in his will three sons, Stephen, John and Edmund. Of these three (1) Stephen Temple, of Sulby, d. s.p., and was bur. 26 Oct. 1672, naming in his will his brother John (as his heir at law), and his brother Edmund. (2) John Temple, of Sibbertoft, co. Northampton, was bur. at Welford, 22 Feb. 1701/2, aged 52, having had by Martha his wife (who d. 1723), two sons, viz. Richard, b. in 1683, of whom nothing more is known, and Purbeck. This Purbeck Temple, b. 1689, was of Sibbertoft aforesaid, and d. 16 May 1763, aged 74, leaving, by Mary his wife (who d. 1771), one son, Edward.
“ There appears every probability that the last named Edward [Temple] was the Baronet for the last ten years of his life [1786–96], unless there was any issue in the male line existing, from his uncle Richard. At any event, it is clear that till his decease [15 Sep. 1796], the dignity could not have devolved on any younger branch of the family.” [Her. and Gen. iii, 542.] This Edward Temple, presumably the de jure Baronet, d. unm., 15 Sep. 1796.
(3) Edmund Temple, 3d and yst. s. of Col. Edmund Temple, of Sulby Abbey aforesaid (who was yr. br. of Sir Peter Temple, “ Knt.” grandfather of the 5th and 6th Baronet), was living 22 Aug. 1683, being then father of a son named Purbeck ; was of Leicester in 1690, soon after which date he appears to have died, leaving Ellen, his widow. His son, Purbeck Temple, was living 14 July 1693, being mentioned in the will of that date of his great uncle and godfather, Sir Purbeck Temple. The male issue of this Edmund Temple, of Leicester, is not, improbably, still in existence.
(84a) By his 2d wife, he had an only child, who m. her cousin, the 7th Baronet. By his 1st wife he had a son, Paxton Temple, b. April 1720, who d. in London unm. and v.p. 1743 ; and a da., Henrietta, b. Dec. 1723, who m. William Dicken, of Shenton, co. Salop. John Dicken, their s. and h., who subsequently inherited the Nash estate, took the name and arms of “ Temple ” by royal lic., 23 Sep. 1796. Their grandson and heir, Richard Temple, of Nash aforesaid, was cr. a Bart. 16 Aug. 1876.
(84b) His elder br. of the half blood, Peter Temple, was in the Royal Navy, but d. unm., v.p., of the small pox, 1748, at Portsmouth.
(85a) Failing any nearer heir male (and none such, apparently, existed) Edward Temple was entitled to the Baronetcy, from 1786 to 1796. He was son of Purbeck Temple (d. 1763, aged 71), son of John Temple (d. 1702, aged 52), son of Col. Edmund Temple (d. 1668, aged 46), son of Sir John Temple (Knt.), of Stantonbury (d. 1632), who was 2d son of the 1st Baronet. See p. 83, note “ d.”
(85b) The remarkable letter to “ Sir John Temple, Bart., Consul Gen., New York,” from the Marquess of Buckingham, dated “ Stowe, 3 Dec. 1786 ” [printed in the Her. and Gen., vol. iv, p. 8], states that on the recent death of Sir Richard Temple, Bart., “ the title devolves upon you as heir male to Sir Peter Temple, my great great grandfather and your great grandfather.” His Lordship does not say that this Sir Peter was a Baronet, and possibly does not mean Sir Peter Temple, Bart., (i.e., the 2d Bart.), the person claimed by the said John for a great great (not great) grandfather. This Peter, the 2d Bart., was great grandfather (not, as stated, to the writer himself, but) to the writer's father, through that father's mother, Hester, Countess Temple, wife of Richard Grenville. Another Sir Peter Temple [Knt., not Bart.] may possibly be meant, who was the lineal ancestor of the lately deceased Bart., and who was great grandfather (not, as stated, to the writer himself but) to the writer's father, the Rt. Hon. George Grenville, son of Richard Grenville (by Hester, Countess Temple above named) and grandson of another Richard Grenville, by Elinor, da. of the last named Sir Peter Temple.
(85c) The male issue of this Edmund is dealt with on p. 83, note “ d,” among which was Edward Temple, who was not improbably the rightful Baronet in 1786.
(85d) In the Visit. of Surrey for 1662, “ Sir Ralph Freeman, of Lee, co. Surrey, Knt., 1662,” is said to have m. “ Margaret, da. of Collonell Tho. Temple, of Stow in co. Bucks, Dr. of the Civil Law.” This is, unquestionably, the 3d son of the 1st Bart., called in the Visit. of 1634, “ Thomas Temple, Dr. of the Civil Law,” and is important as shewing that the said Thomas married and had issue.
(86a) See pedigree of Nelson recorded in the College of Arms in 1769.
(86b) i.e., Sir Thomas Temple, Bart. [S.], who d. unm. 27 March 1674. See page 83, note “ d.”
(86c) She was sister of Nathaniel White, of Plymouth, merchant, living there, Sep. 1717.
(86d) A conjectural father for this Thomas is given in a draft pedigree among the private MSS. of Sir Isaac Heard, Garter [“ J.P., 89,” in the Coll. of Arms], as “ Edmund Temple, Col. of a Regt.,” which Edmund, by subsequent additions, is suggested to have been a “ younger son of Peter, son of Sir Thomas, the 1st Bart.” These suggestions are, however, very unhappy. If Edmund Temple, of Sulby, co. Northampton, who was, undoubtedly, a Colonel, is meant, he had no son named Thomas (see p. 83, note “ d ”) neither was his father named Peter. The 1st Bart. had, indeed, a son Peter, viz., his son and heir, the 2d Bart., which Sir Peter Temple, Bart., left but one son, Sir Richard, the 3d Bart., whose male issue failed in 1749.
(86e) Robert Temple, of Ten Hills, near Boston, the elder br., d. s.p.m., 1781, aged 53, leaving three daughters and coheirs, of whom the second m. Hans Blackwood, afterwards 2d Baron Dufferin and Clandboye [I.]
(86f) On the supposition that the assumption of the Baronetcy [1611], by John Temple, in 1786, was a legal one. For some period it was generally considered as not existing, e.g., “ it is not to be found in Debrett's Baronetage of 1840, but gradually it has reappeared and made its way into Debrett, Burke, Dod and the Court Kalendar.” [Her. and Gen., iv, 284].
(87a) See p. 86, note “ f.”
|
|
