This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
What is the current family seat of the Dukes of Sutherland? They're still outrageously wealthy, so presumably they must have a country house somewhere. Dunrobin Castle is apparently owned by the Coutness of Sutherland, so that's obviously not it. john k 19:28, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Lord Henry Alexander Egerton (b. 1977), younger son of the 7th Duke, is NOT this Dukedom's Heir Presumptive. He is this Dukedom's Heir Apparent's Heir Presumptive. That is not the same thing as being the Heir Presumptive. If the first one of the three to die is the present Duke, at that point Lord Henry's older brother will become Duke of Sutherland. If the new Duke still has no sons at that time, Lord Henry himself will THEN (but not BEFORE then) become the Heir Presumptive of the Dukedom. Right now he is only the Heir Presumptive to the Heir Apparent if the Dukedom, something that works differently from (and therefore IS different from ) being DIRECTLY the Heir Presumptive to the Dukedom.126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:48, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson
Given recent legislation, does the title not now pass down the female side? Shipsview (talk) 09:24, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
What legislation would that be? —Tamfang (talk) 06:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
I don't like the language "heir presumptive to the heir apparent"; it suggests that, if Lord Stafford dies tomorrow, Lord Henry inherits his position as heir apparent – or else that Lord Stafford has some property or dignity separate from his position as heir apparent to which Lord Henry is heir presumptive. Better would be "second heir presumptive" – he is, like everyone else in the remainder, an heir presumptive, in the sense that he inherits if everyone ahead of him dies without (more) sons, though not the first in the queue – or, as it now stands, no such formula at all. —Tamfang (talk) 06:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
The section "Line of succession" could stand improvement. There's no text explaining the transition between the tree of Ellesmere descendants and the numbered list below it, and the latter omits Mark William Godolphin Egerton. —Tamfang (talk) 06:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)