One of the most confusing aspects of writing Regency-based novels is the issue of courtesy titles. We authors are always going back and questioning what we think we know. I have heard readers say to me that this is one area that often confuses them. I will admit that I was in my final round of edits of The Earl Claims His Comfort before I realized I had called a minor character Delia Phillips, the daughter of a viscount, “Lady Delia,” when she should have been “The Honorable Miss Phillips” or to those more familiar to her “Miss Phillips” or even “Miss Delia” for close acquaintances.I cannot tell you how many times I had overlooked the error; nor did any of the three different editors catch the mistake, thinking I had it correct. Therefore, I thought it useful if we reviewed some of the basics of courtesy titles.
By courtesy title, I am referring to the words “Lord,” “Lady,” and “The Honourable.” A peer’s wife and children are granted the use of certain titles, depending upon the rank of the peer (duke, marquess, earl, viscount, baron). These are customarily used by the sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, daughter-in-law and sisters-in-law of a peer. The son and heir apparent of a duke, marquess or earl may use one of his father’s peerage titles by courtesy providing it is of a lesser grade than that used by his father.
The duke’s wife is a duchess. His eldest son usually assumes the next-highest of the duke’s titles as a courtesy title, customarily it is that of a marquess. The duke’s subordinate titles are distributed by courtesy only to his direct heirs, that is, his eldest son, and his eldest son’s eldest son, etc. His younger sons are are Lord First name Surname. The daughters are Lady First name Surname. For example, in my Angel Comes to the Devil’s Keep, we find the Duke and Duchess of Devilfoard, the Marquess of Malvern, Lord Harrison McLaughlin and Lady Henrietta McLaughlin. When the Marquess of Malvern’s son is born, he will become an earl, assuming the duke’s next-highest title, etc. In actual practice in the United Kingdom, the Duke of Devonshire’s eldest son bears by courtesy the title the Marquess of Hartington, and Lord Hartington’s eldest son is the Earl of Burlington. If Lord Hartington were to predecease his father, then Lord Burlington would become the Marquess of Hartington, and his son, if he were to have one, would be addressed as the Earl of Burlington. (Courtesy Titles)
A marquess’s wife is a marchioness. She is called Lady (His Title), i.e., Lady Stonecrest. His eldest son would become an earl as the courtesy title, depending upon the marquess’s highest-ranking minor titles.. The younger sons would be Lord First name Surname (i.e., Lord Frederick). The daughters are Lady First name Surname (i.e., Lady Lucinda).
An earl’s wife is a countess. She is called Lady (His Title). His eldest son assumes the next-highest title as a courtesy title. He is customarily a viscount. The earl’s younger sons are The Honourable First name Surname. Just as it is with the daughter of a duke or marquess, the honorific prefix of “Lady” is used for the daughter of an earl. The definite article ‘The’ (written with the capital letter ‘T’ even when the title appears in the middle of a sentence) before the prefix. The courtesy title is added before the person’s given name, as in the example The Lady Diana Spencer. Because it is merely a courtesy with no legal implications, the honorific persists after the death of the holder’s father but it is not inherited by her children. The spouse of a woman with an honorific title does not hold any courtesy title in right of their spouse. Neither does the husband of a man with any title (including the husband of a peer). Do you recall in Pride and Prejudice, that although Lady Catherine de Bourgh married a baronet, she keeps her courtesy title of “Lady Catherine” because she is the daughter of an earl? As the wife of a baronet, she should be “Lady de Bourgh.”
Laura Wallace provides us some very specific examples: “It was a 17th century custom to throw in a number of new lesser titles to “fill in” when creating a new higher title, so the older a dukedom or an earldom, the more likely the second title is to be a much lower one, skipping steps, if you will: the eldest sons of the Dukes of Norfolk, Grafton, St. Albans, Richmond, Buccleuch, Newcastle, and Northumberland are earls, the Dukes of Dorset’s and Manchester’s are viscounts, and the Duke of Somerset’s only a Lord. But since Dorset’s and Machester’s eldest sons are viscounts, their eldest sons cannot take a barony as a courtesy title. If there is no courtesy title available, the eldest son of a duke, marquess, or earl takes the family name as a courtesy title.
“Several marquesses have the same title as marquess and earl, e.g., the Marquess and Earl of Hertford and the Marquess and Earl of Salisbury. In these cases, the heir skips the matching peerage, and takes the next highest title as a courtesy title, to distinguish him from his father. The heir of the Marquess and Earl of Salisbury is thus Viscount Cranbourne, and the heir of the Marquess and Earl of Hertford is thus Earl of Yarmouth (whose father happens to have two earldoms at his disposal).
“The Duke of Wellington similarly holds two marquessates: that of Wellington and that of Douro, so his heir takes the courtesy title Marquess Douro to distinguish him from his father. [During the 1st Duke’s lifetime, all of his lesser titles were also either Wellington or Douro, and the family name, Wellesley, was used as a title by his brother, the 1st Marquess Wellesley, so I’m not sure what courtesy title would have been given to the eldest son of the eldest son of the 1st Duke of Wellington. Fortunately, the issue never came up; and eventually the Dukes of Wellington also inherited the lesser titles of the 1st Marquess Wellesley (whose title became extinct upon his death), which include the Earl of Mornington and Viscount Wellesley, so there are currently three titles available to the direct heirs of the Duke of Wellington.]
“It is important to note, however, that an heir of a peer who is not a direct descendant of that peer (i.e., his eldest son or his eldest son’s eldest son) does not take any secondary title as a courtesy title. He remains known by whatever title (if any) he derived from his own father until he accedes to the peerage. This is a common mistake in historical romances.
“For example, the 6th Duke of Devonshire never married. Since he also had no brothers, his heir was a cousin. The cousin was a great-grandson of the 4th Duke; before the 6th Duke died, he was plain Mr. William Cavendish. Even though the line of succession was clear, Mr. William Cavendish was never given the courtesy title Marquess of Hartington. Similarly, after Mr. William Cavendish succeeded and became the 7th Duke, he was in turn succeeded by his eldest son, who became the 8th Duke. But the 8th Duke had no son, and he was succeeded by his nephew, a son of his younger brother, Lord Edward. Before he acceded, the 8th Duke was plain Mr. Victor Cavendish.”
A viscount’s wife is a viscountess. She is known as Lady (His Title). All the sons and daughters of a viscount are The Honourable First name Surname (i.e., The Honourable Mr. Davidson).
A baron’s wife is a baroness. Both the baron and his wife are addressed as either “Lord” or “Lady” (His Title). It is not correct to call him Baron Johnstone. He is Lord Johnstone, and his wife is Lady Johnstone. All the sons and daughters of a baron are addressed as The Honourable First name Surname.
From Catherine Kullmann, we can also add, “One additional point: My edition of Titles and Forms of Address, published in 1945 says about the title ‘Honourable’: “The use of this title is not without its difficulties……….The important rule to note is that it is never used in speech, even by a servant. Neither is it used for letter-writing, excepting on the envelope.” Later, when discussing younger sons of Earls, they add ‘The title is never printed on visiting-cards, so that without inner knowledge it is difficult to recognize the rank.”
I have seen it printed in La Belle Assemblée’s list of attendees at Queen Charlotte’s Drawing-Room in 1816, where they simply broke the list down by rang e.g. Dukes, Duchesses, Marquisses, Marchionesses, etc. right down to Misses.
I have also seen in painted on a steamer trunk e.g. The Hon. Mrs John Smith.”
According to Debretts “A peer’s sons and daughters who are legitimated under the Legitimacy Act 1926, as amended by the Act of 1959, are now under an Earl Marshal’s Warrant accorded the same courtesy styles as the legitimate younger children of peers, though they have no right of succession to the peerage (except under certain circumstances in Scotland), or precedence from it. Courtesy styles may continue to be borne by the children of peers who have disclaimed their peerage.
“Children adopted into a family do not acquire rights of succession to a title, and children adopted out of a family do not lose their rights. An Earl Marshal’s Warrant dated 30 April 2004 decreed that the adopted children of peers should be accorded the styles and courtesy titles as are proper to the younger children of peers, but without right of succession to the peerage. Thus, for example, the adopted son of the Marquess of Ely is now known as Lord Andrew Tottenham (which is the style for the younger son of a marquess), rather than Viscount Loftus, which is the subsidiary title for that peerage.”
Debretts peerage has a section on siblings of peers who have special grants of precedency. In all of these cases, a sibling inherited because the father died before the grandfather, therefore, before the father could inherit.
When the eldest brother succeeds to the peerage, he can request that his siblings be granted the precedency they would have had if the father had inherited. Though it is called a grant of precedency it really gives the person all the privileges of such rank such as courtesy titles.
In Valentine Heywood’s British Titles: the Use and Misuse of the Titles of Peers and Commoners (page 113), Heywood addresses what happens with courtesy titles when the heir is not in the direct line of succession. If a nephew, cousin, or other distant relative NOT in the direct line of succession to a peerage becomes the new peer, the Sovereign can accord the new peer’s brothers and sisters with the customary styling, which would have been theirs had their father held the title. Such would be conferred by Royal Warrant.
Heywood mentions only ones not in the direct line, but it is often a case that a marquess’s son is an earl, and the earl’s oldest son is a viscountcy, but the siblings are plain honourables. If the father dies and the viscount becomes an earl, the brothers remain the same, but the sisters can be referred to as Lady First name, however, all the siblings generally would be raised to the higher ranks when the brother succeeds as marquess.
Again, when this article first appeared, Nancy Mayer reminded me, “Authors and writers of book blurbs confuse matters by naming peers as Lord First Name Title rather than First Name Lord Title. or First name title — They say Lord George Jersey instead of George Lord Jersey or George Earl of Jersey.”
I recently purchased 
The Earl of Jersey’s title was created in 1697 for the statesman Edward Villiers, 1st Viscount Villiers, Ambassador to France from 1698 to 1699 and Secretary of State for the Southern Department from 1699 to 1700. He had already been created Baron Villiers, of Hoo in the County of Kent, and Viscount Villiers, of Dartford in the County of Kent, in 1691, also in the Peerage of England. George Child-Villers, 5th Earl of Jersey, was a Tory politician and served as Lord Chamberlain of the Household and as Master of the Horse. Lord Jersey married Sarah Sophia (died 1867), daughter of John Fane, 10th Earl of Westmorland, and his wife Sarah Anne (died 1793), daughter of Robert Child. Through this marriage the private bank Child & Co. came into the Villiers family. On account of the considerable wealth brought to the family through this marriage, in 1819, Lord Jersey assumed by Royal licence the surname and arms of Child, and since then the branch of the family has been known as Child-Villiers.
“He was addressed as The Right Honourable Lord Byron (by strangers and on the outside of letters) and as Byron (the title, not the name) by friends. Intimates seem to have actually called him ‘B’, but this may just be the convention of the time to abbreviate names to initials in writing, but possibly not in fact. Servants would have said ‘My Lord’ but an intimately beloved housemaid, Susan Vaughn, addressed her letters to ‘My Dearest Friend’ and his wife addressed a letter to him, ‘My Dearest Duck’.
Every Woman Dreams... 
#/media/File:Strickland_of_Westmorland_arms.svg){kind=link}