« PreviousContinue »
“2nd. That with a view to checking in future the abuses existing in the Baronetage from the irregular assumption of Titles—This General Meeting resolve and declare: That no person henceforth taking up a Baronetcy after a dormancy or succeeding to such dignity by collateral succession, shall be recognised, held, or considered a Member of the Order, or his name be added to the authentic Roll thereof, who shall fail to submit to the Committee for Privileges the evidence by which his right is instructed, or neglect to record the same in the books of the Committee.
"3rd. That the Committee shall prepare and keep a Great Roll of the Order which every Baronet shall be invited to sign in order that there may be formed a correct and authentic Registry of the Members of the Order.
" 4th. That the Prime Minister having approved of the course pursued by the Lord Chamberlain in the case of Mr. Broun's application for Knighthood, which course the Committee for Privileges after mature deliberation have found and declared to be in direct contravention of the constitution of the Baronetage, a Statute Law of the Realm of Scotland, the Articles of Union, the obligations of the Coronation Oath, and the unbroken precedents of 230 years, this General Meeting do require of Mr. Broun, in whose person the natalitial rights of the Eldest Sons of the whole of the Baronets in the United Realm have been violated, that he will, in virtue of his being a Knight de jure as the eldest son of a member of the Order of ancient creation, vindicate this fundamental and inalienable privilege of the Eldest Sons of Baronets, by henceforth, using, taking, and enjoying the ancient chivalrous dignity of a Knight (Eques Auratus) with the immunities and precedencies thereunto belonging; and that the Committee for Privileges do record the same in the journals of the Order, that the precedent may rule in future the cases of all such Eldest Sons of Baronets as may hereafter apply
for Knighthood under the Letters Patent of the roth and 14th Jac. I., and experience a similar arbitrary and illegal course of procedure on the part of the responsible Officers of the Crown.
"5th. That it be an instruction from this General Meeting to the Committee to direct the especial attention during the course of the year ensuing to the questions connected with the dignity, precedency, and privileges of the wives, daughters, and daughters-in-law of Baronets; to the settlement of the points yet unconcluded as to the Honorary style to be attributed to the Order and to individual members when spoken of, or addressed, in public assemblies; and generally to the prompt and vigorous carrying out of the conclusions arrived at since its institution.
"6th. That the dress uniform shall be scarlet and green ; the undress uniform green, and black or white: the details to be finally arranged by the Committee.
“7th. That the Ulster and Nova Scotia Ribands may be worn either round the neck with the Badge suspended, or scarf-wise without the Badge, at the option of the wearer.
“8th. That as the uniform adopted refers to the military functions vested in the Baronetage, viz., their being a body of Knights for the defence of the Royal Standard of the Sovereign, the device on the button shall be the Royal Standard, surrounded with the Collar S.S., surmounted by an Imperial Crown.
"gth. That all Eldest Sons of Baronets, being Knights de jure by birth with privilege to become Knights de facto on attaining majority, shall have the privilege of wearing the uniform adopted, with the ensigns appertaining to Knighthood, viz., the Collar of S.S., Gold Spurs, Ring, etc.
"Ioth. That the Younger Sons of all Baronets may wear the undress uniform and button of the Order.
"11th. That with a view to setting an example to the Order at large, the Members of Committee resident in London shall be expected to have their uniforms and badges made as soon as possible ; and that such Baronets and Eldest Sons of Baronets, as may be invited during the course of the present or future seasons to parties given by members of the Order, shall be expected to wear them.
" 12th. That this General Meeting at its rising do stand adjourned, subject to the call of the Committee for Privileges."
The Meeting was then adjourned till Monday, 20th of the same month, on the evening of which day the Anniversary Dinner, in celebration of the Birthday of King James I., the Royal Founder of the Order, took place.
It may be worth while to add that before the adjournment of the above Meeting a resolution was passed requiring the Honorary Secretary (Mr. Richard Broun) to vindicate by an act of his own the alleged inalienable right vested in the heirs apparent of the Order. In response to this resolution, Mr. Broun stated that the Prime Minister had not hesitated to approve of, and make himself a party to, proceedings which ought to subject the advisers of the Crown in this matter to public impeachment, and that he (Mr. Broun) had no possible hesitation in complying with a requisition which called upon him to evince his respect and loyalty to the Crown and Monarchy, by acting in conformity with the will and pleasure of the Sovereign Founder of the Order, recorded under the Great Seal of the Realm and promulgated by a Statute Law of that supreme and pre-eminent tribunal, the Estates of Scotland in Parliament assembled. He had presented his application for Knighthood in 1836 because, having led the Baronets to institute proceedings for the restoration of the Baronetage to the original excellence of its foundation, he felt that he was bound, in honour and duty to the Order, not to shrink from asserting in his
own person such rights and privileges as appertain to the Eldest Sons of Baronets; nor did he regret, under all the discourteous opposition which the Order had experienced, that it should be left to him to shew, in the face of the Government and the country, that the Baronetage still enrolled men who would not suffer the constitution of the Order to be infringed upon, or the gracious intentions of its Royal Founder to be treated with contempt. He declared his intention to henceforth use, take, and enjoy the chivalrous dignity, which he claimed to be vested in him, by blood and by Royal Letters Patent, being fully satisfied that Her Majesty on the Throne had no better pretension to the Regal dignity than he and the Eldest Sons of all Baronets had to the dignity of Knighthood. He claimed that he was a Knight under the Letters Patent which elevated his ancestor Sir Patrick Broun, Baron of Colstoun, to the dignity of the Baronetage, and further he claimed that personal investiture was a non-essential in a case where Knighthood is demanded of the Sovereign as a right, and is not asked or sought for as a favour. Knighthood had devolved upon him under the Grant of the Royal Founder, and he could no more be disseized of this natalitial right by the misprision of the Lord Chamberlain than the Prince of Wales could be disseized of the Duchy of Cornwall because he had not received the accolade. Inauguration was a service to be performed on demand; not a prerogative to be exercised by volition; it was an ostensible recognition of a right, but it did not in any respect confer a franchise.
The Queen would not the less have used and enjoyed the Regal dignity, had the parsimonious, levelling spirit of the age debarred her from the solemnities of a Coronation. Were indeed Knighthood and Inauguration equivalent things, so far as regards the Eldest Sons of Baronets, they could not be Knighted under the present reign, for by the chivalrous usages of all Christendom a female is incompetent to receive or to bestow Knightly honour. The obligation, however, resting on the Sovereign, as regards the Eldest Sons of Baronets, was simply to give them, as Knights, those outward marks of their estate and dignity which the conventional term “inaugurate” implied—there was no creating of them Knights de novo.
He had testified his dutiful respect to the Queen by requiring the Lord Chamberlain, as in duty bound, to present him for inauguration, and that officer having refused to do so, he (Mr. Broun) claimed by his own act and deed to assume Knighthood. He threw the responsibility of so doing upon that officer and the Prime Minister, who had sanctioned that officer's conduct. As the heir of a family
antecedent to 1116, who obtained their Baronetage dignities for eminent loyalty to the Crown and services to the Monarchy, he need not say that he made his claim without prejudice to the motto of his race, which ever had been and would be “ Floreat Majestas.” Her Majesty had no subject more devoted than himself, and he could not better evince it, than by repudiating a course of conduct (even although approved of by the head of the Government) which he considered to be treason against the State. If the Order of Baronets, that high Hereditary Estate, had truckled to the doctrine that “the Queen was not bound by the Chartered engagements of her Predecessors,” it would have rendered it infamous with all posterity, and compromised every privilege existing under Letters Patent of the Crown. But, on the contrary, it had acted in a manner which would command the respect and gratitude of the aristocracy of all Christendom.
This vindication by Mr. Richard Broun was not attended with immediate fruit. In 1874, however, the late Lord Beaconsfield advised Her Majesty that the Baronets had