EARLDOM OF EGMONT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20323, 2 August 1929, Page 11

EARLDOM OF EGMONT.

OWNERSHIP OF ESTATES. AN INQUIRY ORDERED. [FROM OI Pv OWN* correspondent.! TiONDOX. June 28. Recently a claim was made to the title and estates of the Earl of Egmonl by James William Perceval, whose father was an early settler in New Zealand. Mr. Justice Maugham, in the Chancery Division last week, directed an inquiry to be made as to who was entitled under two settlements dated IS7O and 1839. made by the. seventh Earl of Eginont, to the osfnfes comprised in the settlements, which are situated in Hampshire and Berkshire. Thn question was raised on a summons issued bv the trustees of tho estates, the respondents being Frederick Joseph Trevelyan Perceval, described as of Pricldis, Alberta, Canada, and James William Perceval, of Forres'one ftoad. Hornsey, each of whom was described as claiming to be the statutory owner of the estates. The trustees asked whether they ought to pay to the first-named respondent, or to some other and what person, the income of investments standing in their names reprobating money subject to tho settlement. Mr. "Gray, who appeared for the trustees, said that there appeared to be some doubt as to v.ho was tho Earl of Egmont, and there was a question as to how the estates were to bo looked after- until it was ascertained who was entitled to them.

Mr. Justice Maugham said he thought tho best way -out o"f the difficulty would bo to appoint the trustees as receivers. Mr. Gray explained that the seventh earl succeeded to the title in 1874, and under the 1870 settlement he was life tenant with remainder to Augustus George Perceval. • Tho latter was shown as having no issue, but there was now a gentleman who claimed- to bo a son of his. .Apart from him, there was no doubt that there was no one who would take under the 1870 settlement. Tlio parties to tho 1839 settlement included the seventh earl. Augustus George Charles John' Perceval, and Augustus Arthur Perceval (the son of Charles John Perceval), described as tho eighth earl. This deed was entered into on the footing that Augustus George had no issue. Ther,a was an unusual story that might somo time have to bo gone The respondent, Frederick Joseph Trevelvan Perceval, was until recently believed to be the heir-presumptivo during the life of the lato earl, but his title had never been strictly proved. Mr. Gavin Pimonds, K.C., said that, he appeared for Frederick Joseph Trevelvan Perceval, who had always been treated as tho present F.arl of Egmont. Mr. Gray said that tlio last admitted tenant for life died last January, and tho trustees had been in possession of tho property since then as the special representatives of the late earl. Mr. Justice Maugham said that he was not. concerned with who was entitled to tho peerage, which was an Irish one—and there wero now special difficulties attaching to these' peerages, tho Act of Union having gone—but only as to who was the statutory owner of the estate. Mr. Gaviii Simonds said that it, might fall to some other body to decide that. To the Earldom of Eizmont there was united the English Barony of Lovel and Holland, and as to that there might he an inoniry in regard to a seat in the House of Lords. . . Mr. Justice Mnnrham Paul that the inquiry ordered would be as (o who was entitled (o he the statutory owner of the estates under wh settlement, and the master who tool: it must have regard to the operation of any of the Statutes of Limitations.