For this week’s quiz, I was tempted to ask which well known television quiz programme, broadcast last night, asserted that Michael Martin was the first Speaker of the House of Commons to be forced out of office since 1695. (Oh dear.) Anyway, here are this week’s questions. As usual, the first two readers to supply the correct answers will be the winners.
1. We both have the same territorial designation in our titles, we have both served as law officers of the Crown and as Cabinet ministers, and have served in different administrations. Who are we?
2. Which surname is currently most common among peers?
3. My title is a territorial one and does not include my family name. I previously served as a Labour MP and I list my interests as “tasting traditional ales, all card games”. Who am I?
4. I hold seven honorary doctorates and I was Woman of Europe 1990. Who am I?
There will be a special commendation for whichever reader gets in first with the correct answer to Question 2.
For question 2, I might have missed something, because there are five Morris, Smith and Thomas so is it a three-way tie?
Or for Q2, it could be Jones if you allow all the hyphenated ones. Failing that, I’d go for Morris because I just spotted Lord Naseby has that as his surname.
Q4 is Baroness Sally Greengross
1) Howe & Morris ‘of Aberavon’
2) Not sure here, If we allow Campbell-Saviours to count then Campbell..otherwise it’s a tie I think with Morris & Thomas
3) Don’t know Lord Glenamara or Northfield?
4) Lady Greengross (Did anyone else cringe and such an award name!)
Q1 is Lords Howe and Morris of Aberavon
Q2 I’m going for Morris (subject to a ruling on the Hyphenated-Jones)
Q3 is Lord Bilston
Q3 is Baroness Greengross
1) Lord Howe of Aberavon, Lord Morris of Aberavon
2) It seems to be Smith, although ‘disguised’ surnames of hereditary peers could make that wrong! – And I suppose “peers” does not limit it to those in the Lords.
3) Lord Glenamara
4) Baroness Greengross
I’m intrigued by territorial designations. How similar do surnames have to be for territorial designations to form part of new titles, and who decides?
Presumably new life peerages have to give way to existing hereditary titles. But what if the title is extinct at the time of its new creation?
Chris K: “The one question I have is whether a peer can choose a title such as Lord Norton of Louth even if there had never been a Lord Norton before”
It’s certainly happened before and unless there has been a rule change could still happen.
As to Lord Louth, it would be vetoed but not perhaps for the reason you give. There are many examples of peerages of the same name created in different peerages (two Earls of Arran, Peerage of Scotland and Ireland). Rather I think it is a county and ‘too important for a life peer’ rule would kick in!
1. Lord Howe of Aberavon and Lord Morris of Aberavon
2. Morris: 6 peers have this surname, including Lord Naseby
3. Lord Bilston
4. Baroness Greengross
2- Howe ?
4 – Thatcher ?
Congratulationss to Dave H who was the first to get all the correct answers, recognising that the answer to Q2 is actually Morris. Six peers have the family name of Morris: Lord Morris of Aberavon (John Morris), Baroness Morris of Bolton (Patricia Morris), Lord Morris of Handsworth (Bill Morris), Lord Morris of Manchester (Alf Morris), Baroness Morris of Yardley (Estelle Morris), and Lord Naseby (Michael Morris). One of these is also part of the answer to Q1, but I thought that may be a bit obscure as a hint. Jonathan was the other reader to recognise that the answer was Morris, so he and Dave H are this week’s winners. The answers are indeed:
1. Lord Howe of Aberavon (Geoffrey Howe) and Lord Morris of Aberavon (John Morris).
2. Morris.
3. Lord Bilston (Dennis Turner).
4. Baroness Greengross.
Croft: Given the titles of some of the officers that serve the Lords, I think I had better not comment on the strange titles utilised by some bodies!
Chris K: Garter King of Arms is responsible for approving titles. There are various rules that apply, some longstanding and some that appear to be somewhat more recent. One cannot replicate a title, however long ago it last existed – though there has been at least one exception. One can distinguish peers by territorial designation. There is, for example, an hereditary Lord Norton. Hence I am distinguished by the territorial title Lord Norton of Louth. (I wanted Louth in the title anyway, so I got my first choice. Just as well really – I didn’t have a second choice.) When former Cabinet Secretary Robert Armstrong was elevated to the peerage, he could not be simply Lord Armstrong because one of his predecessors as Cabinet Secretary, William Armstrong, had taken that as his title as a life peer. Hence, he became Lord Armstrong of Ilminster. For barons (and all life peers are barons) one is not meant to take as the territorial designation anything as grand as a county, though a number have been permitted to take large cities (for example, Lord Alton of Liverpool, Lord Jones of Birmingham, and Lord Morris of Manchester).
That’s very interesting. Thank you Lord Norton.
As Lord Naseby and Lord Bilston seem to have done so, does that mean that Barons can have a title which omits their surname entirely? Could you have chosen to be “Lord Louth” had it not already been a Irish Peerage?
Chris K: as I understand it, peers can always choose a purely territorial title, it’s just that these days most are reluctant to lose the surname they have gained their reputation under.
There was an interesting article on the BBC a few years ago when the late Tony Banks took the title Lord Stratford:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4123628.stm
Lord Harris of Haringey wrote a good piece about the trouble he had using a London borough in his title:
http://bit.ly/cr8xYt
(Yet after all that, he goes and calls himself “Lord Toby Harris”, tut tut…)
The one question I have is whether a peer can choose a title such as Lord Norton of Louth even if there had never been a Lord Norton before.
1. Baron Howe of Aberavon was Solicitor General from 23rd June 1970 to 5th November 1972, and Baron Morris of Aberavon was Attorney General from 2nd May 1997 to 29th July 1999.
2. There are 6 members of the House of Lords who have Jones, Morris, or Smith as their surnames (in each case, five obvious (Bishop of Liverpool is a Jones), plus Baron Chalfont is a Jones, Lord Kirkhill is a Smith, and Baron Naseby is a Morris). As you asked for a singular surname though, I must have missed one, or misunderstood the question.
3. Baron Bilston (Dennis Turner).
4. Baroness Sally Greengross.
P.S. Always having a “first two win” is a bit unfair for people who don’t/can’t check the blog as often as others/ they might like. Perhaps a deadline and drawing correct results out of a hat? 🙂
I’ve seen the previous replies now, and wish to show that there are also six Smiths and Jones, as well as Morris.
The six Smiths are Baron Smith of Clifton (Trevor Smith), Baron Smith of Finsbury (Chris Smith), Baroness Smith of Gilmorehill (Elizabeth Smith), Baron Smith of Kelvin (Robert Smith), Baron Smith of Leigh (Peter Smith), and Lord Kirkhill (John Smith).
The six Jones are Baron Chalfont (Alun Jones), Bishop of Liverpool (James Jones), Baron Jones (Barry Jones), Baron Jones of Birmingham (Digby Jones), Baron Jones of Cheltenham (Nigel Jones), and Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Maggie Jones).
I have to admit I was lucky – I saw the new competition about 45 minutes after it was posted and as I’d just sat down with lunch, I had chance to get to it immediately.
When former Cabinet Secretary Robert Armstrong was elevated to the peerage, he could not be simply Lord Armstrong
So many peers come and go over the years, that it is well nigh impossible to get them right, without being a quiz book worm!
“I’m not that Lord X! I’m the other one!”
being a familiar riposte.
Remembering that little tip for Territorial and Hereditary may not be much more effective, since most of the hereds are out, without a use for their titles, at any event (except to impress).
I should think Law conveyances and Trusts would be in the family name of a hereditary peer; the Earl of Y ,John ABC.
Well at least a old C20 conveyance I saw began by listing the peer as the Most Honourable name Marquis of X. To what extent anyone bothers with the formalities in such documents today I don’t know.
Matthew: Oh dear, an “I forgot Goschen” moment. I overlooked Lord Kirkhill! Smith is thus a joint answer. I discount Jones for the reason I discussed some time ago on the blog: namely, that I treat Lord Chalfont as a Gwynne Jones. In the event, it doesn’t affect the outcome. Having two winners is designed to ensure that there is a chance for someone who is not the first to log on after I have posted the quiz. I’ll give some thought to whether there is a better alternative. Drawing the results out of a hat is less transparent than going with who is first to respond.
As you asked for peers, does that include bishops? Are they Lords Spiritual, but not members of the peerage?
You could try posting at 1am. Daytime is not good for me.
best wishes
Drac.
ladytizzy: I think I did once post the quiz at midnight on a Friday!
You’ll never succeed in government, admitting a mistake. Correct procedure is surely to add a retrospective rule excluding anyone with the surname of Smith!
“If the facts do not conform to the theory then they must be disposed of”.
[Sadly, if the government was more prepared to admit mistakes and the opposition less prone to jump up and down like schoolboys and jeer at them for it, things might work better.]
Dave H: I know. Next I’ll be admitting I’m human.
It is disappointing that one of your number is resorting to the courts when it comes to the reporting of his status.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ashcroft-asked-questions-in-lords-about-tropical-idylls-1824107.html
Are the Lords really such shrinking violets that they cannot deal with reporting from one of our quality newspapers ? If they were intruding on his personal life, this might be understandable, but threatening the Indy with £ 50k and no doubt costs seems a bit like bullying to me.