BUTLER 451 i.e. "Butler of Cloughgrenan" Barony [I.] (Butler), cr. 1662, with the Earldom of Arran [I.], which see; extinct 1686. (^) i.e. "Butler of Lanthony, co. Monmouth" Barony {Butler) {first crea- tion], cr. 1660 with the Earldom of Brecknock. See " Ormonde," Duke- dom of, cr. 1682: all titles forfeited 1715. i.e. "Butler of Lanthony, co. Monmouth," Barony (Butler). This Barony [second creation] conferred, 20 Jan. 1801, on Walter (Butler), Earl of Ormonde [I.] (who was subsequently, 18 16, cr. Marquess of Ormonde [I.]), became, on his death, s.p., 10 Aug. 1820, (as did also the Irish Marquessate) extinct.^') See "Ormonde," Earldom of [I.]. BUTLER (of(0 Moore Park) I. Thomas Butler, st)'led Earl of Ossory' ("the gallant Ossory"), being s. and h. ap. of James, Duke of Ormonde [1.], Earl of Brecknock and Baron Butler of Lanthony [E.], was v.p. sum. to Pari., 17 Sep. 1666, by writ directed Thomae Butler de Moore Park in co. Hertford.^) He d. v.p., 30 July 1680, aged 46. BARONY BY WRIT. I. 1666, II. 1680 to 1715. 00
rn fO ?3 n ^ • s n ^
z ^
w R o-g ^ c -1 ?r i-ri n a- u u &: 3 -1
(- vT^ 3 .^ n 2. James (Butler), Lord Butler (of Moore Park), s. and h., ^. 29 Apr. 1665. On 21 July 1688, he sue. his grandfather as Duke of Or- monde [E. and I.]. Attainted 20 Aug. 171 5, whereby this Barony and his other English and Scottish dignities became forfeited.
(^) Another Barony of Cloughgrenan [I.] (not '■'■Butler of Cloughgrenan") was conferred in 1693 together with another Earldom of Arran [I.], on Charles Butler, nephew of the above, and became extinct in 1758. C*) The Peerage in the United Kingdom conferred, 17 July 1821, on his br. and successor in the Irish Earldom, was Baron Ormonde of Lanthony, co. Monmouth, which br. also, on 25 Oct. 1825, was cr. Marquess of Ormonde [I.]. (') As to the proper form of this title, of course in the Latin writ of summons the Latin word de is employed, but in their origin such writs were certainly not intended to confer any title at all, and the addition of the words "de Moore Park" or "de Ruthyn," as the case might be, was, there can be little doubt, solely for the purpose of identifi- cation (see ante, p. 48, note "e," circa finem). Now that such a writ is held to confer a peerage title it seems very unreasonable to leave the de untranslated even if the address in the writ is to be considered as forming any part of the title at all. Such a case as Stuart de Rothsay, where the title is conferred by patent, whatever we may think of the attempt to give an archaic air by the introduction of a Latin particle, is of course wholly different. V.G. (^) It seems not improbable that the Barony meant was that of "Butler of Lanthony' {cr. 1660) which was vested in his father; and, had the writ been addressed
