Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
After the 1999 reform, only 92 hereditary peers remain as Lords Temporal. Two are the Earl Marshal and the Lord Great Chamberlain. Of the remaining ninety peers sitting in the Lords by virtue of a hereditary peerage, 15 are elected by the whole House and 75 are chosen by fellow hereditary peers in the House of Lords, grouped by party. [7] [2]
The law applicable to a British hereditary peerage depends on which Kingdom it belongs to. Peerages of England, Great Britain, and the United Kingdom follow English law; the difference between them is that peerages of England were created before the Act of Union 1707, peerages of Great Britain between 1707 and the Union with Ireland in 1800, and peerages of the United Kingdom since 1800.
This gradually diminished the numerical dominance of hereditary peers. The Act allowed for the creation of female peers entitled to sit in the House of Lords. The first four such women peers were: Barbara Wootton and Stella Isaacs, who were sworn in on 21 October 1958, and Katharine Elliot and Irene Curzon, who took office the next day. [3] [4]
Thereafter the powers of the nobility were progressively reduced by legislation. However, until 1999, all hereditary peers were entitled to sit and vote in the House of Lords. Since then, only 92 of them have this entitlement, of whom 90 are elected by the hereditary peers as a whole to represent the peerage.
Sons of Peers, the primogeniture heirs of Knights as well as the heirs of certain individuals created such by the Crown are Esquires. A rare hereditary variety of English esquire is found in the West Country, primarily in Devonshire, called White Spur. Though it is possible there remain White Spur families in existence, the title is now not used.
The House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill will abolish the 92 seats reserved for members of the upper chamber who are there by right of birth.
But his amendment to the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill, designed to prevent the Church of England bishops from being members of the Lords, was rejected by 378 votes to 41, majority 337.
Many cases were heard by Lords with no legal education or experience, and this led to public discontent. It was suggested that more judges be appointed to the House of Lords, but it was not desired that their descendants continue to sit by virtue of the peerages they would have inherited had the judges been created hereditary peers. It was ...