Detection of infamy

11
person he described himself to be ; or that thefamily of Lun-
din was equally excluded by the investitures of the family
of Perth, as they were by those of Melfort; or at least that
the children of the Earl of Melfort' s second marriage were
prefer ed. The consequence then is, that the Act of Par-
liament pointing out the heir male, who would have been
entitled to succeed by the investitures of the estate of
Perth, had it not been forfeited seems inconsistent ; the
restoration of the estate not having been made, in tail
male to that heir of investiture, who, as the title and
estates were inseparable before the forfeiture, became,
according to the presumed interpretation of the Act of
restoration, as much entitled to the Honor as the Terri-
torial Inheritance.
But before any further developement of this person,
the late lord Perth, shall be made, a few remarks with re-
gard to the House of Melfort become necessary.
It is known that the title of Duke of Melfort, altho'
a Scotch honor confirmed by Louis XIV. was given at
St. Germain's, and is not acknowledged by the English
Parliament. But that the Earl of Perth, on the contrary,
is an ancient title belonging to the head of the house of
Drummond. — This title was never forfeited, and there-
fore belongs as it is considered by right to the Duke of
Melfort.
Of the name of Melfort, there are two branches : the
eldest, called the Ducal Branch, are British subjects; for
John Lord Forth, grandfather of the present Duke, was
born in Scotland in the year 1682, and consequently before
the Revolution of 1688.
The second branch of the family of Melfort, called
Counts De Melfort, are aliens; for Lord Andrew Drum-
mond, the fourth son of the Earl of Melfort, was born at
Rome, when his father, the Earl, was Ambassador of King
James at that Court: this Lord Andrew could not there-
fore transmit to his children the Privilege of the sons of