Norwich bulletin., 1922-01-19
Famous. Trials
kNoLLYs' CLAIM TO AN Et

kNoLLYs' CLAIM TO AN EARLDod.
A legal controversy lasting nearly
200 years was the unusual case of the
knoyllys' claim for the peerage~ of Ban
bury. The title was conferred in 1926
by the unfortunate Charles I, upon
William knollys, who died in 1892 al
the age of IS. This man, the first Earl
of Banbury, was twice married. His first
wife was Dorothy, the widow of Ed
mund Bridges by whom he had no
children. Two months after her death
he again married. this time a girl 40
years his junior-Elizabeth, daughter of
Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk Their
married life was happy by what may
be inferred in his settlement, in which
he refers to "the love and affection which
he beareth unto the said Lady Eliza
beth, his wife, having always been a
good and loving Wife"
It was thought that this eccentric old
man died childless, for all his estates
and lands were left to his wife, and as
in his will no mention of any children
was made. A claim for the title was
made by the Countess two sons the first
Edward, born on the 10th of April 1897
and the second. Nicholas, who was born
in January, 1921, at Harrowden, North
amptonshire, the residence of Edward
Vaux, fourth Lord Vaux. The first clam
in this great legal controversy was the
right to piece of land at Henley known
as the Bowling Place The petitioner was
found that Edward now Earl of
awarded the decision and the court
Banbury, is. and at the time of the
Earfs decease, was, his son, and next
heir"
! Four years after this Edward was kill
led in a quarrel in France and buried
at Calais. Nicholas Knollys, termed the
| third Earl of Banbury, thereupon as
stunned the title. AS seemed to be the
| custom, Nicholas was trice married and
| soon after his second alliance took his
| seat in the House of Lords After the
dissolution of the Convention Parliament
a petition was filed questioning his right
| for the seat in the house. The com
| mittee for privileges before whom the
second petition was heard, decided that
| Nicholas Earl of Banburv, Is legiti-
mate person." but never again was his
| name seen on the roll of the House of
| Lords
Called forth Earl Of Banburv and
born in 1852, son of Nicholas, was
CHARLES Knollys, who, when % years
old, petitioned the house for writ
Of summons This, the naughty peers
entirely ignored, and when after a
silence of 80 years the case was again
brought in the spotlight 1t was not
through choice. Another convenient
: custom Of the day seems to have been
fighting duels. and for so doing, and
killing his opponent, Charles was
charged with murder. He at one,
:. claimed to. be tried by his peers ant
so the whole case was retired, for, be
8 fore he could be tried for the murde,
a trial was held to decide whether or no
he was a noble,
: After a thorough investigation tn
d Lords decided that Charles had n,
= claim to the title and he was conse
quently removed to Newgate for tn
murder. From here he made anothe
petition and after year Of debat
g ing he was set free on the groun
# that he was the Earl of Banbury. Charlie
lie at once applied for a writ of summon
.e to sit in the house, but so divided wer
tht Lords that the case dragged On =.
his death in France OF his son. Charlie
and his grandsons we hear but little. HI
great-grandson. William Knollys, Gale
i eighth Earl of Banbury, was lieuter
oe ant colonel in the army.
I'd In 1906 William presented petitio
for writ as a peer. and two year
later Sir Bicary Gibbs, the attorne
IN general, reported that the previous d,
:, cision given by the Lords was not
- conclusive judgment, but at the san
Is time there was some doubt as to tt
'e legitimacy of the first petitioner, Nicf
s. olas Vaux. AS this verdict was mott