On 2013-07-07 22:44:33 +0000, Charles Ellson said: >> I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and >> Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed to venture up the 'posh end'> >> >> Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a previous >> owner of a military sword, one John Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) >> In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's >> career etc is confirmation from The Central Chancery if the Orders of >> Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he was amongst those "To be Ordinary >> Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of >> the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". >> >> Okay, so that is confirmed, but would this entitle his wife/widow to >> style herself as 'Lady Fulton'? >> > IMU there isn't actually any prohibition on a woman styling herself as > "Lady XYZ" as long as there is no fraudulent intent or actual/implied > false claim to anything titular other than the simple use of "Lady" > before a normal variation of her name. If I've read various sources > correctly then a mere Companion (distinct from a Knight Companion) is > not a Knight so while she might have been free to be a "Lady" her > husband wasn't a "Sir". Thanks. She seems to be billed as Lady Fulton in the various things I have read about the building of the Fulton Block, but there again, she was forking out £250,000 in the 1930s so I suppose the recipients would have called her anything she liked :-) -- Tickettyboo

Tickettyboo <tickettyboo@mail2oops.com> wrote: > On 2013-07-07 22:44:33 +0000, Charles Ellson said: > >>> I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and >>> Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed to venture up the 'posh end'> >>>>> Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a previous >>> owner of a military sword, one John Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) >>> In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's >>> career etc is confirmation from The Central Chancery if the Orders of >>> Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he was amongst those "To be Ordinary >>> Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of >>> the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". >>>>> Okay, so that is confirmed, but would this entitle his wife/widow to >>> style herself as 'Lady Fulton'? >>>> IMU there isn't actually any prohibition on a woman styling herself as >> "Lady XYZ" as long as there is no fraudulent intent or actual/implied >> false claim to anything titular other than the simple use of "Lady" >> before a normal variation of her name. If I've read various sources >> correctly then a mere Companion (distinct from a Knight Companion) is >> not a Knight so while she might have been free to be a "Lady" her >> husband wasn't a "Sir". > > Thanks. She seems to be billed as Lady Fulton in the various things I > have read about the building of the Fulton Block, but there again, she > was forking out £250,000 in the 1930s so I suppose the recipients would > have called her anything she liked :-) A bit more background info you most probably have already found:- Captain John Duncan Bertie Fulton RFA Date: 15 November 1910. Used a Farman Biplane at Salisbury Plain. He was awarded the third R.Ae.C. Special certificate on 6 December 1911. Later a Lieutenant Colonel and Chief Inspector of the Aeronautical Inspection Department of the Royal Flying Corps when he died 11 November 1915. This from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pilots_awarded_an_Aviator's_Certificate_by_the_Royal_Aero_Club_in_1910> According to 'Flight' magazine he left £6,191 when he died. <http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDQQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flightglobal.com%2Fpdfarchive%2Fview%2F1916%2F1916%2520-%25200181.html&ei=umjaUd-AMYLa0QW63YDAAQ&usg=AFQjCNGKQYUUUE7_3AspY6oh-djj-y4K7Q&sig2=Iwn9c-C2gEBWE8cVujG1cA&bvm=bv.48705608,d.d2k> -- wtwjgc (Joe) <http://welcometowakefield.org.uk/>