I must take this opportunity of complaining of the manner in which many, if not all these Peerages, are compiled: copying each others' errors, however obvious, without a word of doubt or an attempt to rectify them; though MR. HARDY's communication, above mentioned, shows that the materials for doing so, in many cases, exist if properly sought. Not to mention minor errors, they sometimes crowd into a given time more generations than could have possibly existed, and sometimes make the generations of a length that has not been witnessed since the patriarchal ages. As instances of the former may be mentioned, the pedigree of the Ferrerses, Earls of Derby (in which eight successions from father to son are given between 1137 and 1265), and those of the Netterville and Tracy families: and of the latter, the pedigree of the Fitzwarines, which gives only four generations between the Conquest and 1314; and that of the Clanricarde family. It is strange that Mr. Burke, who appears to claim descent from the latter, did not take more pains to rectify a point so nearly concerning him; instead of making, as he does in his Peerage, one of the family to have held the title (MacWilliam Eighter) and estates for 105 years!--an absurdity rendered still more glaring by this long-lived gentleman's father having possessed them fifty-four years before him, and his son for fifty-six years after him. If such can be supposed true, the Countess of Desmond's longevity was not so unusual after all.
May I be allowed to inform your correspondent R. L. P. that he is in error, when supposing that the English knights were deprived of their property by Queen Elizabeth, as it was done by act of parliament in the year 1534, and during the reign of Henry VIII.
For the information sought by your correspondent R. L. P., I would refer him to the following extract taken from Sutherland's _History of the Knights of Malta_, vol. ii. pp. 114, 115.:
"To increase the despondency of L'Isle Adam [the Grand Master of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem], Henry VIII. of England having come to an open rupture with the Pope, in consequence of the Pontiff's steady refusal to countenance the divorcement of Catherine of Arragon his queen, commenced a fierce and bloody persecution against all persons in his dominions, who persisted in adhering to the Holy See. In these circumstances, the Knights of St. John, who held themselves bound to acknowledge the Pope as their superior at whatever hazard, did not long escape his ire. The power of the Order, composed as it was of the chivalry of the nation, while the Prior of London sat in parliament on an equality with the first baron of the realm, for a time deterred him from openly proscribing it; but at length his wrath burst forth in an ungovernable flame. The knights Ingley, Adrian Forrest, Adrian Fortescu, and Marmaduke Bohus, refusing to abjure their faith, perished on the scaffold. Thomas Mytton and Edward Waldegrave died in a dungeon; and Richard and James Bell, John Noel, and many others, abandoned their country for ever, and sought an asylum at Malta[4], completely stripped { 629} of their possessions. In 1534, by an act of the legislature, the Order of St. John was abolished in the King of England's dominions; and such knights as survived the persecution, but who refused to stoop to the conditions offered them, were thrown entirely on the charity of their brethren at Malta. Henry offered Sir Wm. Weston, Lord Prior of England, a pension of a thousand pounds a year; but that knight was so overwhelmed with grief at the suppression of his Order, that he never received a penny, but soon after died. Other knights, less scrupulous, became pensioners of the crown."