Both of these
children were living when the inquisition was made. The first was born
when the Earl of Banbury was in his eightieth year, and his wife
between forty and forty-one years of age, and the second came into the
world almost when his father was about to leave it, and when the
countess was between forty and forty-five. Within five weeks after the
death of the earl, her ladyship married Lord Vaux of Harrowden, who
had been on terms of intimate friendship with the family during the
deceased nobleman's lifetime, and it was plainly said that the
children of Lady Banbury were the issue of Lord Vaux, and not of the
earl.

On the 9th of February 1640-41, a bill was filed in Chancery by
Edward, the eldest son, described as "Edward, Earl of Banbury, an
infant," by William, Earl of Salisbury, his guardian, and
brother-in-law of the Countess of Banbury. Witnesses were examined in
the cause; but after a century and a-half their evidence was rejected
in 1809 by the House of Lords. There was, however, a more rapid and
satisfactory means of procedure. A writ was issued in 1641, directing
the escheator of Berkshire "to inquire after the death of William,
Earl of Banbury;" and the consequence was that a jury, which held an
inquisition at Abingdon, found, with other matters, "that Edward, now
Earl of Banbury, is, and at the time of the earl's decease was, his
son and next heir." The young man, therefore, assumed the title, and
set out on a foreign tour. He was killed during the next year near
Calais, while he was yet a minor. His brother Nicholas, then about
fifteen years of age, at once assumed the title. In the same year Lord
Vaux settled Harrowden and his other estates upon him. His mother, the
Countess of Banbury, died on the 17th of April 1658, at the age of
seventy-three, and Lord Vaux departed this life on the 8th of
September 1661, aged seventy-four. Meantime Nicholas had taken his
seat in the House of Lords, and occupied it without question for a
couple of years. The Convention Parliament having been dissolved,
however, he was not summoned to that which followed it, and in order
to prove his right to the peerage petitioned the Crown for his writ.
This petition was heard by the Committee for Privileges, which
ultimately decided that "Nicholas, Earl of Banbury, is a legitimate
person."

At his death he left one son, Charles, who assumed the title of Earl
of Banbury, and who petitioned the House of Lords to take his cas