@uncivil-s.bsky.social
Barrister, ex-public sector, semi-demi-retired, various legal part time jobs. Legal interests public law, housing and some property, crime, statutes, and most other things. Lives Birmingham, works in a 150/mile 270 degree crescent therefrom. Has sons.
I give way to your knowledge - I think I have only tried it once or twice. And no doubt they were substandard varieties.
November 26, 2025 at 11:05 PM
I give way to your knowledge - I think I have only tried it once or twice. And no doubt they were substandard varieties.
(Why is there something masquerading as a url in this post? I didnt put it there.
November 26, 2025 at 11:04 PM
(Why is there something masquerading as a url in this post? I didnt put it there.
Slightly relatedly, I ordered a brandy this evening in a so-so Italian restaurant in Birmingham, and that came with a not-asked-for lump of ice.
November 26, 2025 at 11:01 PM
Slightly relatedly, I ordered a brandy this evening in a so-so Italian restaurant in Birmingham, and that came with a not-asked-for lump of ice.
Perhaps because it’s Japanese whiskey? (I tried an Indian single malt a while back in a bar round here, and it would have benefited from some flavour cancelling ice).
I.bar
November 26, 2025 at 10:59 PM
Perhaps because it’s Japanese whiskey? (I tried an Indian single malt a while back in a bar round here, and it would have benefited from some flavour cancelling ice).
Well, yes, there’s some big names. But not much below them, perhaps?
November 26, 2025 at 10:57 PM
Well, yes, there’s some big names. But not much below them, perhaps?
Or that it’s a practice largely confined to Oxbridge? (I knew one who practiced niche-ly and remuneratively at my lower Russell group place, although he’s at Oxford now).
November 26, 2025 at 10:50 PM
Or that it’s a practice largely confined to Oxbridge? (I knew one who practiced niche-ly and remuneratively at my lower Russell group place, although he’s at Oxford now).
Oh, I’m all for it.
November 26, 2025 at 10:47 PM
Oh, I’m all for it.
Also, “Duke” as dux goes back to sub-Roman Britons, although I suppose you’d just say that that’s just a semantic link.
November 26, 2025 at 10:39 PM
Also, “Duke” as dux goes back to sub-Roman Britons, although I suppose you’d just say that that’s just a semantic link.
I’ll be corrected on this, but I think that Earldoms are in fact Danish. Wasn’t it eaoldormans before Canute? And they were a bit different.
November 26, 2025 at 10:35 PM
I’ll be corrected on this, but I think that Earldoms are in fact Danish. Wasn’t it eaoldormans before Canute? And they were a bit different.
Curious how this enjoyably peripheral, not to say frivolous, exchange follows a rather serious point made by the LCJ and reported by Joshua Rozenberg.
November 26, 2025 at 10:27 PM
Curious how this enjoyably peripheral, not to say frivolous, exchange follows a rather serious point made by the LCJ and reported by Joshua Rozenberg.
I suppose it was because it was a more or less Tudor invention, so too new-fangled?
November 26, 2025 at 10:25 PM
I suppose it was because it was a more or less Tudor invention, so too new-fangled?
You will have me looking for my several-editions-out-of-date Correct Form shortly…
November 26, 2025 at 10:12 PM
You will have me looking for my several-editions-out-of-date Correct Form shortly…
Oh, interesting. Thanks.
November 26, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Oh, interesting. Thanks.
I don’t know, but it wouldn’t surprise me for a moment.
November 26, 2025 at 10:10 PM
I don’t know, but it wouldn’t surprise me for a moment.
Good question, and interesting parallel with PC. I wonder if it would work for the son of a hereditary appointed as a life peer? (I assume everyone appointed now is a life peer?). I have a vague memory that some disavowed hereditary was so appointed before the expulsion.
November 26, 2025 at 10:09 PM
Good question, and interesting parallel with PC. I wonder if it would work for the son of a hereditary appointed as a life peer? (I assume everyone appointed now is a life peer?). I have a vague memory that some disavowed hereditary was so appointed before the expulsion.
Only peripherally relatedly, the older son of a peer had the privilege of sitting on the woolsack during HL debates, a right I once saw exercised by Stephen Benn, then a co-opted member of the ILEA, despite his father’s long since disavowal.
November 26, 2025 at 9:56 PM
Only peripherally relatedly, the older son of a peer had the privilege of sitting on the woolsack during HL debates, a right I once saw exercised by Stephen Benn, then a co-opted member of the ILEA, despite his father’s long since disavowal.
Yes, but I think @giffordhead.co.uk ‘s point was that any one, even if they had no title themselves, who was the son of an Earl would have been accorded that formality in older times.
November 26, 2025 at 9:54 PM
Yes, but I think @giffordhead.co.uk ‘s point was that any one, even if they had no title themselves, who was the son of an Earl would have been accorded that formality in older times.
Not formally, I don’t think, but it was @giffordhead.co.uk ‘s point - I thought it was merely correct form, but happy to be corrected.
November 26, 2025 at 9:52 PM
Not formally, I don’t think, but it was @giffordhead.co.uk ‘s point - I thought it was merely correct form, but happy to be corrected.
I think that’s Jacob’s point! A younger son per se would have been so called?
November 26, 2025 at 9:49 PM
I think that’s Jacob’s point! A younger son per se would have been so called?
I think that usage must have disappeared some time ago. Re women, the Countess of Mar was a hereditary in her own right when I was knocking about the HL, and always so referred to.
November 26, 2025 at 9:47 PM
I think that usage must have disappeared some time ago. Re women, the Countess of Mar was a hereditary in her own right when I was knocking about the HL, and always so referred to.
I missed out on”in the 1960s” after “only in the” I. That post, which makes it make little sense.
November 26, 2025 at 9:26 PM
I missed out on”in the 1960s” after “only in the” I. That post, which makes it make little sense.
I don’t think men are ever addressed as “Baron”, even if they are one.
November 26, 2025 at 9:23 PM
I don’t think men are ever addressed as “Baron”, even if they are one.