Talk:Richard Graham, 1st Viscount Preston

NPOV

Removed description as "inglorious Jacobite conspirator," and rewrote to read "accused Jacobite conspirator." I don't actually know anything about this guy historically, but calling someone "inglorious" for their political beliefs seems NPOV to me. 76.94.49.56 (talk) 04:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

"Inglorious", not because of his beliefs, but because of his conduct after his arrest, which resulted in general disgust among the Jacobite community. I will add something to make that clearer.--45ossington (talk) 06:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Reads fair to me.76.94.49.56 (talk) 06:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, on second thought, try my edit on for size. I think instead of using an adjective, it should say why he was a disappointment to his allies (i.e. dropping a dime).76.94.49.56 (talk) 06:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Or how about this? On reflection, my use of "inglorious" was an attempt at mild satire, which doesn't work when accompanied by detailed explanation and is perhaps better omitted in any event.--45ossington (talk) 07:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Its a pity that over time wiki editing tends to strip away artful language. In any event, I think "after his arrest" reads as redundant, and am clipping it off. 76.94.49.56 (talk) 14:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Well clipped!--45ossington (talk) 17:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Jacobite peerage/s

The article says "In a gesture, which was also intended to be a test case, James II, created him, by letters patent dated at St. Germain-en-Laye 21 January 1689 Viscount Preston, of Netherby in the County of Cumberland and Baron Liddall of Esk, in the Peerage of England, which titles were not recognised subsequently by the House of Lords. ... Meanwhile, the Earl of Montagu had commenced an action against him ... Preston thereupon appeared before the House of Lords on 11 November, claiming the privilege of a peer of the realm in respect of the action at law. He stated that he had received a patent to be an English Peer from James II before the vote of abdication passed. The house thereupon sent him to the Tower, and instructed the attorney-general to prosecute him for a high misdemeanor. He was, however, released on making a humble apology and withdrawing his claim, 27 November." The Lords Journals are at 11 November 1689, 12 November 1689 and 27 November 1689 but they do not record what the purported peerage was. Cobbett's Parliamentary History, Volume 5, column 421 says that "he was created baron of England". N. Luttrell, A brief historical relation of state affairs from September 1678 to April 1714, Vol 1, P603 (1857) says that the patent was "to make him an English baron". Ruvigny's Jacobite Peerage, page 47 says that the title was "Baron of Esk". Googling for "Viscount Preston, of Netherby" produces four hits, three of which are either this page or derivatives of it. I therefore propose to change the article to read "James II created him, by letters patent dated at St. Germain-en-Laye 21 January 1689, Baron of Esk, in the Peerage of England". Alekksandr (talk) 14:29, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Now done.Alekksandr (talk) 22:06, 25 November 2016 (UTC)