Conte della Catena, 1745, Baron Strickland of Sizergh Castle, 1928.
Last update: 16-04-2023.
Granted to: Nobile Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna.
By: Manoel Pinto de Fonseca, Grand Master of Malta.
On: 1745 in Valletta.
With Remainder to: Unlike the great majority of titles conferred by the Grand Masters, the title of Conte delle Catene, or delli Mori conferred by Grand Master Pinto, by a patent of the 20th January 1745, upon Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna was specifically conferred so as to further enhance a property already held in entail by the grantee. This title was granted on the 20th January 1745, upon Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna and his sons, born and to be born, as well as on his heirs and successors, whether relations or strangers. The entail referred to in the relative grant was the agnatial entail founded by Don Alessandro Perdicomati Bologna with a faculty to nominate amongst the male descendants. The following is an extract from the deed of grant:- “Te supradictum Dominum Petrum Cajetanum Perdicomati Bologna tuosque filios jam natos vel nascituros, haeredes et successores primogenitos et etiam extraneos, Comitem et Comites Territorii seu Tenutae delle Catene hodie vero delli Mori appellati, positi in hac Nostra Insula a te et antecesoribus possessi jure pleni dominii et proprietatis, nec non Primogenitura masculinae ordinatae per bon mem canonicum Don Alessandro Perdicomati Bologna…..in feudum nobilem sub titulo comitis erigimus atque extollimus.”. The entail is described in the footnote below was subject of court litigation. It is to be especially remarked that the terms of ennoblement extend to Perdicomati’s sons, as well as on his heirs and successors, whether relations or strangers and that this title follows the tenure of the territory known as Catene. That is to say, unlike other titles which provide for a remainder in favour of descendants of the relative grantee, succession to this title is to be reckoned according to the possessor of the land who must be a male. This effectively means that the title may be succeeded to by strangers in blood of Pietro Gaetano Perdicomato Bologna. Moreover, the Report observes that the remainder of the above extract favours not only the one of the grantee’s descendants, but the grantees sons (born and to be born) heirs, AND successors (tuosque filios jam natos vel nascituros, haeredes et successores primogenitos et etiam extraneos), meaning that grant may allow to a plurality of claims being founded on the grant dated 1745. This view appears to be reinforced by the grant’s use of the term comitem et comites. See:- Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.) (Paras. 35-36). On the other hand, the entail referred to above was an indivisible primogenitura and that ulterior succession was to be limited according to a primogenitura favouring males. Therefore although the grant envisages the possibility of a plurality of sons of the grantee, the remainder is effectively restricted only by reason of the indivisible nature of the entail restricted in favour of males
List of Title holders:
1. Nobile Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna, 1st Conte, succeeded by his son.
2. Nobile Nicola Perdicomati Bologna, 2nd Conte, succeeded by his eldest daughter.
3. Nobile Johanna Perdicomati Bologna Bonnici Platamone, 3rd Contessa, succeeded by her sister.
4. Nobile Maria Angelica Perdicomati Bologna Sceberras, 4th Contessa, succeeded by her son.
5. Nobile Sir Nicola Sceberras Bologna, KCMG, (d. 1875), 5th Conte, succeeded by his grand nephew.
6. Nobile Sir Gerald Strickland KCMG, 1st Baron Strickland of Sizergh, UK, (d. 1940), 6th Conte, succeeded by his grandson.
7. Nobile Lt Cdr Thomas Henry Hornyold Strickland dei Marchesi Gandolfi, (d. 1983), 7th Conte, succeeded by his son.
8. Nobile Henry Charles Hornyold Strickland dei Marchesi Gandolfi, (1951-, 8th Conte.
Heir; Nobile Hugo Hornyold Strickland dei Marchesi Gandolfi, (1979-, Contino della Catena.
Granted to: Nobile Sir Gerald Strickland, KCMG, Count della Catena.
By: King George V of United Kingdom.
On: 1928 at London, England, UK.
With Remainder to: to his heir males of his body.
List of Title holders:
1. Nobile Sir Gerald Strickland, (d. 1940), KCMG, Count della Catena, 1st Baron, extinct 1940.
Articles relating to this title:
Footnote: Unlike the great majority of titles conferred by the Grand Masters, the title of “Conte delle Catene,” or “ delli Mori” was specifically conferred so as to further enhance a property already held in entail by the grantee. This title was granted on the 20th January 1745, upon Pietro Gaetano PerdicomatiBologna and his sons, born and to be born, as well as on his heirs and successors, whether relations or strangers.
It is to be remarked that at the time the Royal Commission was first constituted, this title was the only one to be indicated in the list of “Titled Heads of the Maltese Nobility” as being in dispute (See:- “Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility”, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.), pages 54-55)) By the end of the Commission, other titles were found to be disputed.
In any case, it is to be especially remarked that this title “follows” the tenure of the territory known as “Catene”. That is to say, unlike other titles which provide for a remainder in favour of descendants of the relative grantee, succession to this title is to be reckoned according to the possessor of the land who must be a male. This effectively means that the title may be succeeded to by strangers in blood of Pietro GaetanoPerdicomato Bologna. Moreover, the Report observes that the remainder of the above extract favours not only the one of the grantees descendants, but the grantee’s sons (born and to be born) heirs, AND successors(tuosque filios jam natos vel nascituros, haeredes et successores primogenitos et etiam extraneos), meaning that grant may allow to a plurality of claims being founded on the grant dated 1745. This view appears to be reinforced by the grants use of the term comitem et comites.
This observation was made by the Royal Commissioners. (See:- “Correspondence and Report of the Commission appointed to enquire into the claims and grievances of the Maltese Nobility”, May 1878, presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty (C.-2033.) (See Report Paras. 35-36).
The actual report says the following:
“The title of ‘Conte delle Catene,’ or ‘ delli Mori,’ which is the eighth in order of date, was conferred by Grand Master Pinto, by a patent of the 20th January 1745, upon Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna and his sons, as well as on his heirs and successors, whether relations or strangers. The terms of the patent are almost identical with those of the preceding grant, and this dignity is annexed to the landed estate delle Catene or delli Mori. The said estate was by that patent erected into a noble feud. The following is an extract from the deed of grant:- “Te supradictum Dominum Petrum Cajetanum Perdicomati Bologna tuosque filios jam natos vel nascituros, haeredeset successores primogenitos et etiam extraneos, Comitem et Comites Territorii seu Tenutae delle Catene hodie verodelli Mori appellati, positi in hac Nostra Insula a te et antecesoribus possessi jure pleni dominii et proprietatis,nec non Primogenitura masculinae ordinatae per bon mem canonicum Don Alessandro Perdicomati Bologna…..in feudum nobilem sub titulo comitis erigimus atque extollimus.”.
The title of conte being annexed to the feud and Primogenitura Bologna, on succession to which a suit is at present pending, in the civil courts of these islands, between Marchese Felicissimo Apap and Luisa, widow of Captain Walter Strickland, in her own name, and on behalf of Gerardo her son, who is a minor, we must necessarily refrain from expressing any opinion on the subject.
And as the title is to be enjoyed by that of the contending parties to whom the Primogenitura will by a definitive sentence be awarded, no one of the claimants will, in the list appended to this Report, be designated as “Conte delle Catene”, or “delli Mori”, and the decision on the matter in dispute must be left to the competent authority.
For mere information, however, we beg to state that the last holder of the Primogenitura and of the title of conte, was Sir Nicolo Sceberras Bologna, K.C.M.G., and that one of the two suitors, Luisa, widow of Captain Strickland, is the daughter of Maria Teresa Bonici nee Sceberras, eldest married sister of the last possessor, and that the other suitor, Marchese Felicissimo Apap, is the son of Maria Apap nee Sceberras, youngest sister of the said Sir Nicolo.
It is to be remarked however that apart from the consideration that he grant also conferred the title on all of the grantee’s sons, that the entail referred to above was an indivisible primogenitura and that ulterior succession was to be limited according to a primogenitura favouring males. Therefore although the grant envisages the possibility of a plurality of sons of the grantee, the remainder is effectively restricted only by reason of the indivisible nature of the entail restricted in favour of males.
In any event and as predicted by the Commissioners, succession to the Primogenitura was to be decided by a Court of Law. This was finally decided by the 10th February 1883 by the Lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in favour of Geraldo Strickland who by inference succeeded to the title of Catena.
According to the Code de Rohan of 1783, a primogenitura is a regular individual primogeniture consisting of chattels which devolved from first-born to first-born in the descendental line. It can pass on to collaterals, the determining criteria operating in the following order: line (the first line excluding all the others), degree (the closer degree of relationship excluding the remoter) sex (the male sex being preferred to the female), and age (the elder being preferred to the younger). On the other hand, a majorat was an irregular entail which did not abide by the criteria of primogeniture : there can be many variations, but a common feature was that – contrary to the case of regular primogeniture – the criterion of the first line or sex is not given decisive effect. In either case, unless the foundation allowed it, an entail could not be alienated. In this way, the title of Catena was effectively protected by primogeniture.
The outcome of the court case between Apap and Strickland rested on this neat distinction between a regular and irregular primogenitura. It appears that the entail in question was irregular because it was subjected to a preference for males as well as a faculty to nominate a successor outside the primogenial line. When eventually a possessor died without having made a nomination, the entail provided for automatic succession in favour of the primogenial (male) descendant. The facts as narrated by that judgment (and by the Royal Commissioners in the extract above) said that Felicissimo Apap was closest in degree to the last possessor who had been nominated to possess the entail, whereas Strickland was in a better line from PietroGaetano Perdicomati Bologna.
The judgment favoured Strickland on the basis that line was to be preferred to degree and that any variance to a regular primogenitura was to be construed limitedly so as to not destroy the character of a primogenitura. Thus the judgment concluded that where no nomination was made, the primogenitura in question was to automatically devolve in favour of the primogenial descendant of Pietro GaetanoPerdicomati Bologna, preference being given to a male. At the time, the latter happened to be Geraldo Strickland as represented by his mother.
The final judgment of the Lords (Ref: 8 A.C.106) says thus: The general rule governing the succession to a primogenitura is thus expressed in Rohan’s “Diritto Municipale di Malta”, B. iv.c.ii. s.10, “To succeed in primogenitures, in the absence of any particular rule, one must consider, in the first place, the line, in the second place, the degree, in the third place, the sex, and in the fourth place the age.” The same rule is to be found in many other books of authority. The present primogenitura differs from a strictly regular primogenitura by preferring (i) sex to line and degree, and (ii) by giving powers of nomination. The rule must therefore be modified in its application so far as such preference and such powers render necessary, but no farther; the principle still obtains, when it is not at variance with the terms of the instrument, that line is to be preferred to degree and age. The difference of the application of the rule, as far as concerns line and degree, to “primogenituras” and “majoratus” respectively is thus clearly illustrated by Torre, vol. I, sect. 5, page 51. After expressing his opinion that, in a majoratus, the younger son of the last possessor would take in preference to the son of the elder son deceased, because he is nearer in degree, he proceeds to state, as an uncontrovertedproposition, that in a primogeniture the nephew because he is in a better line, would exclude the uncle. The remainder of the clause relative to the devolution of the primogenitura in the absence of nomination must, in their Lordships judgment, be construed relatively to the power of nomination. It is almost incredible that the settlor should have restricted the latitude of nomination within certain limits, and should have desired the devolution of the property in the absence of nomination, to go beyond those limits; still less that it should go so far beyond those limits to destroy the whole character of the primogenitura he was founding, nor is such a construction consistent with the strict language of the clause. In default of actual nomination one is to be deemed nominated: “censeatur nominates”. The natural meaning of that expression is that this imported or supposed nomination is to be of the same nature as the real nomination might have been. The limit of line must be taken to apply to devolution in the absence of nomination (omissis.. Thus the power of nomination and the gifts in default of nomination have precisely the same range of objects. The gifts in default of nomination apply the ordinary rules of primogenituras to the cases not before expressly provided for; the power of nomination gives the possessor a free choice in those same cases; but neither the nomination, nor the gifts in default of it, operate to displace the order of vocation or preference expressly prescribed by the previous parts of the deed.
The succession of properties under entail was revoked by the ENTAILED PROPERTY (DISENTAILMENT) ACT (ACT XII of 1950). Unlike the DISENTAILMENT OF PROPERTY (EXTENSION TO FIEFS) ACT (ACT XXX of 1969), there is no provision in this ACT for titles of nobility. Thus, after 1950 the property known as “Catena” came to be held like any other property.
In view of the wide wording of the original grant (founded on the premise that the title “follows” the property) which is now no longer effectively restricted by an indivisible entail, it would at first sight appear that a plurality of claims may be entertained on the basis that more than one male descendant of PietroGaetano Perdicomati Bologna may come to own the property of Catena. This consideration is immediately dismissed by the by the limitation successores primogenitos.
On the other hand, however it appears that that once the grant allows for remainder in favour of strangers in blood, it follows that if the property or part thereof were to be alienated (to a male), any (male) successor of the territory of Catena would be entitled to the title. This latter consideration is immediately tempered by the consideration that in order to achieve this purpose, it is the fundamental character of the property that should be alienated and that the mere acquisition of a small portion thereof would not suffice to found a claim to the title.
* Title of Count della Catena
HISTORY
The title “Conte delle Catene” or “delli Mori” is a title of Nobility in Malta. It was granted in 1745 by a Grandmaster of the Order of Saint John during its rule over the Maltese Islands. The remainder of this title is remarkable as it is not governed by the instrument which created the title but by the terms of a private entail founded earlier. Succession to this title is according to the general rule of Primogeniture but in this case the rule is varied as the title may only be held by males. This title is often referred to as “Conte della Catena”.
Since 1950, succession by entail was abolished in Malta by Act 12 of 1950 dated 5 May 1950.
Since 1975, titles of nobility are no longer recognized in the Republic of Malta by Act 29 of 1975 dated 17 October 1975.
ORIGIN AND NATURE OF TITLE
The title of ‘Conte delle Catene,’ or ‘ delli Mori,’ was conferred by Grand Master Pinto, by a patent of the 20th January 1745, upon Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna and his sons, as well as on his heirs and successors, whether relations or strangers. The terms of the patent are almost identical with those of the title of Conte della Bahria, and this dignity is annexed to the landed estate delle Catene or delli Mori. The following is an extract from the deed of grant:- “Te supradictum Dominum Petrum Cajetanum Perdicomati Bologna tuosque filios jam natos vel nascituros, haeredes et successores primogenitos et etiam extraneos, Comitem et Comites Territorii seu Tenutae delle Catene hodie vero delli Mori appellati, positi in hac Nostra Insula a te et antecesoribus possessi jure pleni dominii et proprietatis, nec non Primogenitura masculinae ordinatae per bon mem canonicum Don Alessandro Perdicomati Bologna…..in feudum nobilem sub titulo comitis erigimus atque extollimus.”.
No land was attached to this title of nobility. However, this title is attached to an entail, known as the “Bologna entail”. The possession of the entail gives rise to the right to succeed the title of Conte della Catena.
Some publications show a number of ladies as having succeeded this title as “Countesses of Catena”. These ladies are neither counted nor included here because the entail to which the grant is subject does not comprehend any remainder in favour of females. If any lady held the entail, this would seem to have been held under some family arrangement and not under the terms of the entail which is stated to be a “Primogenitura masculinae”. As seen in “Barone della Grua” it is a settled point of jurisprudence that the appellation of male descendants includes not only the sons issuing from the male line (masculi ex masculis), but also those issuing from the female line (masculi ex foeminis). However, as seen in “Barone della Marsa” that where only males are contemplated by the grant one cannot extend these terms to include females.
PRECEDENCE ENJOYED BY THE HOLDER OF THE TITLE OF CONTE DELLA CATENA
Before the above creation, the then Grand Master Depuig had introduced in 1739 the concept of according a form of precedence to a holder of a title of nobility. The relative law is reproduced hereunder:-
Hosplis Mgr et Hierlem Sti. Sepulchri. – Per togliere le differenze di precedenze tra le persone che saranno promosse alla giurazie dell’ Universita’ della Notabile e della Valletta, vogliamo, ordiniamo e comandiamo che tutte siano precedue dagli infrascritti, e che fra queti si regoli la precedena call’ ordine seguente cioe’: Primieramente, chi fu Capitano della Verga della Sudetta Citta’ Notabile e nostra Isola di Malta.; Secondo. Il Titolato che ha un titolo fondato sopra un feudo in realta’ esistente qui, benche’ non lo possegga.; Terzo. Il titolato che non ha un titolo fondato sopra fondo realmenteesistente nel nostro Dominio, registrato che sia il titolo nella Cancelleria nella nostra Religione e nella Gran Corte della nostra Castellania, e pagato per i rispettivi registramenti il diritto di scudi cento sedici di questa moneta, da dividersi per meta’ tra la Cancelleria e la Castellania sudetta.; Quarto. Il discendente per linea mascolina da chi fu Capitano della Verga, se vive colle proprie rendite, e se i di lui ascendente intermedie vissero pure colle proprie rendite.; Quinto. Il discendente per linea mascolina da un titolo con titolo fondato sopra un feudo qui realmente esistente, se vive colle proprierendite, e se i suoi ascendenti intermedie cosi vissero; Sesto. Chi fu primo Giurato della Notabile; Settimo. Chi fu primo Giurato della Valletta; Ottavo. Il piu’ anziani di Giurazia di quella Universita’ dellaquale sara’ creato giurato.; Nono. Chi fu Giudice d’Appello Criminale o Civile della Gran Corte della Castellania e della Corte Capitanale e Governatoriale; Diecimo. Il Dottore di Leggi ed il Dottore di Medicina.: – Dichiariamo che fra le persone d’un stesso grado si deve attendere l’anzianita’ del titolo primordiale e che chiunque fu Giurato, se sara’ fatto Console di Mare, fra i quali s’attendera l’anzianitad’ufficio. Dat. In Palatio, die xvi. Septembris 1739 (f. Despuig)
On the basis of this enactment it follows that in 1745 all of Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna’s male-to-male descendants (“Il discendente per linea mascolina”) were made automatically entitled to a precedence.
The latter enactment was amended in 1795 by the same Grand Master Rohan as follows:
Hosplis Magr. Hierlem. Sti. Sepulchri, et Ordinis Sti Antonii, Viennensis Essendo una massima universalmente ricevuto, che il maggior lustro della Nobilta’ principalmente dipende dalla sua maggiore antichita’, niente che il piu’ giusto e ragionevole che il piu’ antico Nobile preceda il piu’ moderno. Siamo pertanto venuti nella determinazione di Ordinare che nel regolarsi la precedenza tra le persone Nobile di questo nostro Dominio, cosi’ primogeniti che cadetti indistintamente, si abbioa ad avere unicamente riguardo alla maggiore o minore antichita’ del titolo che nobilito le loro famiglie, e cio tanto se il titolo sara’ stato concesso da Noi o Nostri predecessori, che se lo avessero ottenuto da Principi esteri, purche’ pero sara’ stato questo debitamente registrato nella Nostra Cancelleria e Gran Corte della Castellania; nel consorso pero’ di ugual data quello nella di cui persona concorreranno piu’ titoli dovra’ essere preferito, all’ altro che ne avesse meno, secondo la graduazione stabilita nel Chirografo Magisteriale del Nostro Predecessore Gran Maestro Despuig di Gl. Em. Del 16 Sept 1739, quale in quelle parti che non contradicono la questa nostra disposizione intendiamo di pienamente confermare.Datum in Palatio die xvii Martii 1795 (f.) Rohan
In view of the latter enactment the Conte della Catena and his male-to-male descendants were to rank before the holder of any title created after 1745 and respective descendants. Conversely, the Conte della Catena ranks after the older creations (mostly barons) and the holders of noble fiefs. The same position holds in regard to the respective male-to-male descendants.
Grand Master Rohan is also credited with codifying various laws in Malta. Amongst these, we find in the Code enacted in 1783 which states that the determining criteria of primogeniture in Malta operate in the following order:- Line (the first line excluding all the others), Degree (the closer degree of relationship excluding the remoter) Sex (the male sex being preferred to the female), and Age (the elder being preferred to the younger).
SPECIAL RULES OF SUCCESSION OF THE “BOLOGNA ENTAIL”
The “Bologna Entail” differed from the general rules of Maltese primogeniture. It is described in the 1745 grant as a “Primogenitura masculinae”.
THE ROYAL COMMISSION APPOINTED TO ENQUIRE INTO THE CLAIMS OF THE MALTESE NOBILITY
After the Capitulation of the Order of Saint John the new French Rulers formally abolished all titles of nobility. (General Napoleon Bonaparte issued two orders dated 13 and 16 June 1798 prohibiting the use of any title “ORDRE (1) QUARTIER GENERAL DE MALTE, LE 25 PRAIRAL, AN VI (13 JUIN 1798): Le General en Chef ordonne……(ARTICLE 2.)… Toutes les armoires seront abbatues dans l’ espace de 24 heures. Il est defendu de porter dest livrees, ni aucune marque et titre distinctif de noblesse. ORDRE (2) AU QUARTIER GENERAL DE MALTE, LE 28 PRAIRAL, AN VI (16 JUIN 1798): Bonaparte Membre de l’Istitut National, General-en-Chef ordonne…(ARTICLE CINQUIEME)….Dix jours apres la publication du present ordre, il est defendu d’avoir des armoires soit dans l’interieur, soit a l’exterieur des maisons, de cacheter des lettres avec des armoires, ou de prendre des titres feodaux. ……(ARTICLE DOUZIEME)….Tous les contrevenants aux articles cidessous, seront condamnes pour la premier fois, a une amende du tiers de leurs revenus; pour la seconde fois, a trois mois de prison; pour la troisieme fois a un an de prison; pour la quatrieme fois, a la deportation de l’ile de Malte, et a la confiscation de la moitie de leurs biens. Il devra toujours y avoir 10 jours d’intervalle entre la recidive.”
Another Order was issued by Bosredon Ransijat, President of the Commission du Gouvernement dated 18 Messidor Year 6 (6 July 1798), where it was enacted that all honorary titles should be burnt on the 14th of that month and that every holder of a title should carry his patent at the Arbre de la Liberté.
The French in turn lost Malta in 1800 to a contingent raised by Captain Ball and Admiral Nelson. Malta later became a British Protectorate after the Treaty of Paris of 1814.
In time, the use of nobiliary titles was resumed. However, it appears that this use was unregulated.
Eventually, the British Secretary of State for the Colonies commissioned a report in 1876, on those titles alleged to have been conferred to Maltese families before the annexation of Malta to the British Dominions, namely 1800. The Commissioners’ Report and Supplemental Report were published in 1878 together with relative correspondence.
COMPETING CLAIMS OF GERALD STRICKLAND AND FELICISSIMO APAP TO THE “BOLOGNA ENTAIL”
In 1878, the “Bologna Entail” and therefore the title of Conte della Catena was claimed by Gerald Strickland and the Marchese Felicissimo Apap. As the matter was already the subject of court litigation, the Royal Commissioners opted not to make a separate decision.
Although the 1745 grant refers to the “Primogenitura masculinae ordinatae per bon mem canonicum Don Alessandro Perdicomati Bologna”, the entail which was in fact discussed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Committee_of_the_Privy_Council was an entail founded by Canon Gio Francesco Mangion’s will dated 10 June 1737 which had come to the possession of Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna by the 3 November 1739. It is here understood that the Primogenitura masculinae described in the 1745 Grant and the 1737 Will refer to the same entail.
The Bologna Entail differs from a strictly regular primogenitura by preferring (i) sex to line and degree, and (ii) by giving powers of nomination. In 1875, the Conte Nicola Sceberras died without issue and without having made a nomination to succeed him in the entail (and therefore the title). The succession became the subject of court litigation, the question being whether Gerald Strickland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Strickland%2C_1st_Baron_Strickland (later Lord Strickland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baron_Strickland ) born in 1861 son of Nicola Sceberras’s eldest sister was to be preferred to the Marchese Felicissimo Apap born in 1834 son of Nicola Sceberras’s younger sister. Apap’s position relied on being nearer in Degree, Strickland’s relied on being in the nearer Line.
FINAL OUTCOME OF THE COURT LITIGATION IN FAVOUR OF GERALD STRICKLAND
The final judgment was given by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Committee_of_the_Privy_Council in favour of Gerald Strickland.
The judges held that in regard to the Bologna Entail, the general rule of Primogeniture must be modified in its application only so far as so far as such preference and such powers render necessary. It therefore held that the principle that line is to be preferred to degree and age. The judges explained that the whole character of the entail could not be destroyed by the special preference and power to nominate, thereby meaning that the limit of line must be taken to apply to devolution in the absence of nomination.
CONTROVERSIES
Some publications show Gerald Strickland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Strickland%2C_1st_Baron_Strickland as having succeeded his mother (i.e. a female) in this entail and title. However, this view does not find any basis in the entail to which the title is subjected.
In fact even the 1745 grant describes the entail as a Primogenitura masculinae. Any contention that Strickland’s mother ever succeeded this entail is done away with by the fact that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Committee_of_the_Privy_Council confirmed that Strickland succeeded his uncle Nicola Bologna.
In addition, the same Commissioners had already pointed out in their findings on the 1775 creation of “Barone della Marsa” that where only males are contemplated by the grant one cannot extend these terms to include females.
OTHER ENTITLEMENTS
For the purposes of precedence amongst the Nobility in Malta, this title ranks according to antiquity of creation. According to the 1878 Report, this title was considered before the title of Barone della Marsa granted by Grand Master Rohan to Gio Francesco Dorell Falzon on the 10 March 1775 and after the title of Conte della Bahria granted by the Grand Master Pinto to Ignazio Muscati Falsone Navarra on the 16 May 1743.
As from the year 1886, the holder of this title of Nobility became entitled to be styled “The Most Noble”.
The presumed successor of this title is by custom entitled to be styled Contino della Catena. (See: Value of the Maltese usage of “Marchesino, Contino and Baroncino”
Other descendants of the various holders of this title are by custom entitled to be styled dei Conti della Catena. (See Value of the Maltese usage of “dei Marchesi, dei Conti and dei Baroni”
PRESENT DAY
Since 1950, succession by entail was abolished in Malta by Act 12 of 1950 dated 5 May 1950.
Since 1975, titles of nobility are no longer recognized in the Republic of Malta by Act 29 of 1975 dated 17 October 1975.
GENEALOGY
The genealogy of the Counts della Catena is as follows:
Original creation (1745)
· Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna, 1st Conte della Catena
· Nicola Perdicomati Bologna, (Pietro Gaetano’s son), 2nd Conte della Catena
· Nicola Sceberras Bologna (Nicola Perdicomati’s daughter’s son), 3rd Conte della Catena
· Gerald Strickland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Strickland%2C_1st_Baron_Strickland , (Nicola Sceberras Bologna’s eldest sister’s son), 4th Conte della Catena (died 1940)
· Thomas Henry Hornyold Strickland (Gerald Strickland’s eldest daughter’s son), 5th Conte della Catena (died 1983)
Succession after abolition of entail (1950)
· Henry Charles Hornyold Strickland (Thomas Hornold’s eldest son), 6th Conte della Catena
REFERENCES
PRIMARY REFERENCES (GRANT/S):
1. Grant of title of Conte delle Catene hodie vero delli Mori appellati granted by Grand Master Pinto, to Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna on the 20 January 1745. (Recorded in the Archives of the Order, National Library, Malta Ref. AOM 549, ff. 174r-174v)
2. “Primogenitura masculinae ordinatae per bon mem canonicum Don Alessandro Perdicomati Bologna”
3. entail founded by Canon Gio Francesco Mangion’s will dated 10 June 1737
4. Deed concerning the 1737 entail attended by Pietro Gaetano Perdicomati Bologna on the 3 November 1739
SECONDARY REFERENCES (HISTORY):
(1) CORRESPONDENCE AND REPORT OF THE COMMISSION APPOINTED TO ENQUIRE INTO THE CLAIMS AND GRIEVANCES OF THE MALTESE NOBILITY, MAY 1878, PRESENTED TO BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT BY COMMAND OF HER MAJESTY (C.-2033.):
(2) REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF PRIVILEGES OF THE MALTESE NOBILITY ON THE CLAIMS OF CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THAT BODY WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S REPLY, AUGUST 1883, PRESENTED TO BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT BY COMMAND OF HER MAJESTY (C-3812)
(3) Copies or Extracts of Correspondence with reference to the Maltese Nobility (In continuation of C3812, August 1883), presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty May 1886 (C-4628a)
(4) John Montalto, “The Nobles of Malta 1530-1800” (Midsea Books, Malta, 1980)
(5) Judgment of the Lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Committee_of_the_Privy_Council on the appeal of Strickland v. Apap, from the Court of Appeal of the Islands of Malta, delivered 10th February 1883.
TERTIARY REFERENCES (PUBLISHED GENEALOGY):
(1) Crispo Barbaro “THE NOBLES OF MALTA, AND THE MALTESE GENTRY HOLDING FOREIGN TITLES AS AT PRESENT EXISTING BY GEO. G.C.’A. CRISPO BARBARO MARQUIS OF ST. GEORGE” MALTA:- A.D. MDCCCLXX (THE ANGLO-MALTESE PRESS, MALTA, 1870)”
(2) Charles Gauci “THE GENEALOGY AND HERALDRY OF THE NOBLE FAMILIES OF MALTA” (GULF PUBLISHING, MALTA, 1981)“
(3) Charles Gauci A GUIDE TO THE MALTESE NOBILITY” (PEG PUBLICATIONS, MALTA, 1986)
(4) Charles Gauci “THE GENEALOGY AND HERALDRY OF THE NOBLE FAMILIES OF MALTA VOLUME TWO ” (PEG PUBLICATIONS, MALTA, 1992)
(5) Charles Gauci “THE GENEALOGY AND HERALDRY OF THE NOBLE FAMILIES OF MALTA VOLUME ONE ” (PEG PUBLICATIONS, MALTA, 2002)
