Lord North(s) question

The heir to the Earl of Guilford is Lord North. There is also a Barony
of North (abeyant since 1942).

My question is this: If the Barony came out of abeyance, how would one
differentiate (title wise) between the 2 Lord Norths?

Peter Tilman...

The Earls of Guilford could do what the Earls of Huntingdon have done and
style the heir Viscount North.

Otherwise there generally wouldn't be a way (not that that would be a
particularly unacceptable situation).

Graham Truesdale...

As far as I can see, this was an issue pre-1942. My 1939 Burke's shows
the substantive peer as 'Baron North' and the courtsy one as 'Lord North'
but doesn't say how they were distinguished.

Brooke
bxzi@yahoo.com

Julius...

One would have a courtesy title [the heir to Earl Guilford] and would
be a commoner. The other would have a substantive peerage title: Baron
North (of Kirtling Tower).

sionevar...

But in day to day speech when referring to either person, how would you
distinguish between them? Would you call Baron North just that instead of
Lord North?

Stan Brown...

Nope -- in day to day speech there's nothing to distinguish a
substantive peer from a courtesy peer of the same grade.

Julius...

Couldn't one be referred to as Lord North and the other be called
Lord North of Kirtling Tower just to differentiate the two in
conversation?

Turenne...

It would be a bit awkward, you don't refer to someone in conversation
as John Smith, you simply say 'John' or 'Mr Smith'. Anyway, there are a
couple Baron Archers, you wouldn't want to keep referring to the one
with the criminal conviction as Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare whilst
in conversation with him.

Richard Lichten