![Foreword
Marine pollution is at present part of the media circus. Who has not been
shocked by the images of moribund seabirds spreading their coal-black wings,
or dolphins strained on a plastic-invaded beach? The advantage of this media
focus is the public support gained for pollution remediation and prevention
initiatives, but the disadvantage is the lack of scientific rigor in the debates
concerning pollution. According to H.L. Windom, “the focus of attention on
coastal [pollution] problems has been based more upon public perceptions
than on sound scientific evaluations of sources, fates and environmental
effects.”1
J. S. Gray illustrated the same problem with the case of the planned
dumping of the disused oil rig Brent Spar in deep water off the Scottish coast.
Eventually the dumping was stopped after a Greenpeace campaign against it,
but the decision did not include any rational elements since neither
Greenpeace nor Shell gave any data on the environmental risk of the
optionsdsinking or disposal on shoredand the decision-makers did not
consider any scientific study, though they were available.2
In 2009, at the onset of the economic crisis in Spain, President Zapatero
declared on TV, “I want to make a call to the citizens [.] they must keep on
consuming.” Consumption is considered by conventional wisdom as the en-
gine of the economy. In fact, this ignores the most basic principles of ther-
modynamics. Since the 1980s, E. Odum called our attention to the need to
change focus from maximizing production (and thus consumption of re-
sources and generation of wastes) to maximizing efficiency, the ratio between
production and consumption. Slowlydperhaps too slowly?dthis true wisdom
permeates societies, but the effects on the decision-makers are so far more
cosmetic than real. The part of this question that is scientists’ responsibility is to
conduct hard science to study environmental issues. Scientists replaced priests
as advisors of the empowered leaders only because their predictions were more
reliable. The higher the certitude of the scientific predictions the more influ-
ential they will be for decision-makers. Ecotoxicology must be just as rigorous
as medicine, and nobody conceives discussing in the media the diagnostic of an
ill patient or the most suitable drug and correct dose to be prescribed.
xiii](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/36570-250708091640-edf05710/85/Marine-Pollution-Sources-Fate-and-Effects-of-Pollutants-in-Coastal-Ecosystems-Ricardo-Beiras-8-320.jpg)
![At Clumber, too, are preserved four highly interesting Roman
sepulchral altars, which were thus described by the Rev. Archdeacon
Trollope, with the accompanying engravings:[53]—“No. 1 bears the
following inscription on the two small front panels: m. caedici . favsti .
negotiator . de . sacra . via . caedicia . syntyche . conliberta—one that is
interesting as bearing reference to a tradesman of the celebrated Via
Sacra at Rome. The birds pecking at a basket of fruit between them
would seem to claim a Christian origin for this work of Art, had not
the ox’s head and pendent sacrificial garland in addition to the heads
at the angles—apparently of Jupiter Ammon—pointed to
heathenism; the garland intermixed with birds, below the inscription,
is both rich and graceful. No. 2 rises from an enriched plinth,
bearing, first, on the pediment of its coped lid, the inscription: d. m.
m. ivni . ivniani, and, on a panel below, d. m. antonia . tarentina . conivgi
. bene . merenti . fecit, forming a short but affectionate epitaph from a
wife to a husband, worthy in these respects of modern imitation.
Four masks are placed at the corners of the lid, and on another part
of the lid appears a boar, for which animal Tarentum was famous.
The figures sculptured in front perhaps represent one of the funereal
games. No. 3 is a well-designed coped urn, both its form and details
having received much careful attention. Within a long panel,
surrounded by an enriched moulding, is the inscription, ti . ivlio .
felici . manneia . trepteetti . ivlivs . philonicvs . heredes . fecervnt. No. 4
is a longer and lower urn than the others, having two small panels
prepared for inscriptions, which never appear to have been filled up.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/36570-250708091640-edf05710/85/Marine-Pollution-Sources-Fate-and-Effects-of-Pollutants-in-Coastal-Ecosystems-Ricardo-Beiras-36-320.jpg)
![vast length, and is beautifully diversified with statuary, vases, lovely
beds of flowers, and shrubs and trees; from it flights of steps lead
down to the lake, and other steps give access to the Italian Gardens.
A great feature of the grounds is the enormous size and singular
growth of the cedars: some of these are said to be unsurpassed in
England both for their girth and for their magnificently picturesque
and venerable appearance. Some of the conifers, too, are of
extraordinary size and beauty.
The Kitchen Gardens are extensive and well arranged, and the
Park well stocked.
The Lake is one of the glories of Clumber. It is a splendid sheet
of water, covering some eighty or ninety acres of ground, and
beautifully diversified on its banks with woods of tall forest trees and
rich verdant glades. On the bosom of the Lake rest two ships—one a
fine three-master, forming a striking feature in the view.
The neighbourhood of Clumber is rich in places of interest and in
lovely localities;[54] and its near proximity to Sherwood Forest—
indeed, it is itself a part of that forest reclaimed—to Thoresby, to
Hardwick Wood, to Welbeck, to Osberton, to Worksop and its manor,
to Bilhagh, to Rufford, and to a score of other inviting localities,
renders it one of the pleasantest, most desirable, and most
enjoyable of “Homes.”](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/36570-250708091640-edf05710/85/Marine-Pollution-Sources-Fate-and-Effects-of-Pollutants-in-Coastal-Ecosystems-Ricardo-Beiras-38-320.jpg)
![Arms of the Duke of Portland.
(for Bentinck); 2nd, a snake nowed, proper (for Cavendish).
Supporters—two lions, double queued, the dexter one or, the
sinister one sable. Motto—“Craignez honte.”
The Duke of Portland’s seats are
—Welbeck Abbey, Nottinghamshire;
Fullarton House, Troon, Ayrshire;
Langwell, Goldspie, Caithness;
Bothal Castle, Northumberland;
Harcourt House, Cavendish Square;
and Hyde Park Gardens.
The heir-presumptive to the
titles and estates of the Duke of
Portland is his grace’s cousin, Major-general Arthur Cavendish
Bentinck, youngest son of the late Lord William Charles Augustus
Cavendish Bentinck, brother of the fourth duke. He was born in
1819, and married, first, in 1857, a daughter of Sir Vincent
Whitshed, Bart., who died in 1858 (by whom he has a son, William
John Arthur Charles James Cavendish Bentinck); and, secondly, in
1862, Augusta Mary Elizabeth, daughter of the Hon. and Very Rev.
Henry Montague Browne, Dean of Lismore, by whom he has also
issue.
The earliest views of the mansion of Welbeck are those which
occur on the magnificent folio plates which accompany the Duke (at
that time Marquis) of Newcastle’s splendid and matchless work on
“Horsemanship”[55] in 1658. The plates are all splendidly engraved
from Diepenbeck’s drawings, and are among the most valuable
illustrations of the period left to us. One of these plates gives a
general view of Welbeck (“La Maison de Welbeck appartenant à
Monseigneur le Marquis de Newcastle, le quel est dans la Province
de Nottingham”), showing an extensive building four stories in
height, and partly enclosed with battlemented and other walls; the
end having three gables, with a central doorway, and the side of
three distinct lengths. The main building, that with the three gables,
is four stories in height, with mullioned and transomed windows,
hipped windows in the roof, and ornamental clustered chimney-](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/36570-250708091640-edf05710/85/Marine-Pollution-Sources-Fate-and-Effects-of-Pollutants-in-Coastal-Ecosystems-Ricardo-Beiras-55-320.jpg)
Marine Pollution: Sources, Fate and Effects of Pollutants in Coastal Ecosystems Ricardo Beiras
- 1. Marine Pollution: Sources, Fate and Effects of Pollutants in Coastal Ecosystems Ricardo Beiras download https://ebookmass.com/product/marine-pollution-sources-fate-and-effects- of-pollutants-in-coastal-ecosystems-ricardo-beiras/ Visit ebookmass.com today to download the complete set of ebooks or textbooks
- 2. Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to download, or explore more at ebookmass.com Fate and Impact of Microplastics in Marine Ecosystems. From the Coastline to the Open Sea 1st Edition Edition Juan Baztan https://ebookmass.com/product/fate-and-impact-of-microplastics-in- marine-ecosystems-from-the-coastline-to-the-open-sea-1st-edition- edition-juan-baztan/ Annotated Atlas of Coastal and Marine Winds 1st Edition Nazla Bushra https://ebookmass.com/product/annotated-atlas-of-coastal-and-marine- winds-1st-edition-nazla-bushra/ Ecology of Coastal Marine Sediments: Form, Function, and Change in the Anthropocene Simon Thrush https://ebookmass.com/product/ecology-of-coastal-marine-sediments- form-function-and-change-in-the-anthropocene-simon-thrush/ Biological Approaches to Controlling Pollutants: Advances in Pollution Research Sunil Kumar https://ebookmass.com/product/biological-approaches-to-controlling- pollutants-advances-in-pollution-research-sunil-kumar/
- 3. Asian Atmospheric Pollution: Sources, Characteristics and Impacts Ramesh P. Singh https://ebookmass.com/product/asian-atmospheric-pollution-sources- characteristics-and-impacts-ramesh-p-singh/ Modern Treatment Strategies for Marine Pollution: Recent Innovations Senthil Kumar https://ebookmass.com/product/modern-treatment-strategies-for-marine- pollution-recent-innovations-senthil-kumar/ Air Pollution Calculations: Quantifying Pollutant Formation, Transport, Transformation, Fate and Risks 1st Edition Daniel A. Vallero https://ebookmass.com/product/air-pollution-calculations-quantifying- pollutant-formation-transport-transformation-fate-and-risks-1st- edition-daniel-a-vallero/ The Unexpected in Oral History Ricardo Santhiago https://ebookmass.com/product/the-unexpected-in-oral-history-ricardo- santhiago/ Of Fate and Fire Amanda Bouchet https://ebookmass.com/product/of-fate-and-fire-amanda-bouchet/
- 5. Marine Pollution Sources, Fate and Effects of Pollutants in Coastal Ecosystems Ricardo Beiras University of Vigo
- 6. Elsevier Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, Netherlands The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom 50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions. This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein). Notices Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary. Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility. To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-0-12-813736-9 For information on all Elsevier publications visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals Publisher: Candice Janco Acquisition Editor: Louisa Hutchins Editorial Project Manager: Michelle W. Fisher Production Project Manager: Omer Mukhthar Designer: Christian J. Bilbow Typeset by TNQ Technologies
- 8. Foreword Marine pollution is at present part of the media circus. Who has not been shocked by the images of moribund seabirds spreading their coal-black wings, or dolphins strained on a plastic-invaded beach? The advantage of this media focus is the public support gained for pollution remediation and prevention initiatives, but the disadvantage is the lack of scientific rigor in the debates concerning pollution. According to H.L. Windom, “the focus of attention on coastal [pollution] problems has been based more upon public perceptions than on sound scientific evaluations of sources, fates and environmental effects.”1 J. S. Gray illustrated the same problem with the case of the planned dumping of the disused oil rig Brent Spar in deep water off the Scottish coast. Eventually the dumping was stopped after a Greenpeace campaign against it, but the decision did not include any rational elements since neither Greenpeace nor Shell gave any data on the environmental risk of the optionsdsinking or disposal on shoredand the decision-makers did not consider any scientific study, though they were available.2 In 2009, at the onset of the economic crisis in Spain, President Zapatero declared on TV, “I want to make a call to the citizens [.] they must keep on consuming.” Consumption is considered by conventional wisdom as the en- gine of the economy. In fact, this ignores the most basic principles of ther- modynamics. Since the 1980s, E. Odum called our attention to the need to change focus from maximizing production (and thus consumption of re- sources and generation of wastes) to maximizing efficiency, the ratio between production and consumption. Slowlydperhaps too slowly?dthis true wisdom permeates societies, but the effects on the decision-makers are so far more cosmetic than real. The part of this question that is scientists’ responsibility is to conduct hard science to study environmental issues. Scientists replaced priests as advisors of the empowered leaders only because their predictions were more reliable. The higher the certitude of the scientific predictions the more influ- ential they will be for decision-makers. Ecotoxicology must be just as rigorous as medicine, and nobody conceives discussing in the media the diagnostic of an ill patient or the most suitable drug and correct dose to be prescribed. xiii
- 9. In fact, this book has a practical and applied vocation. I am an empirical sci- entist fascinated by the elegant simplicity of the scientific method based on contrasting hypotheses at the light of observation and experimentation. Excess of theoretical apparatus has been identified as one of the limitations of ecological sciences, and the debates on the effects of environmental factors, including the nonconcept of “global change,” on the stability of ecosystems seem to me a good example of this. As R.H. Peters complained, logic, i.e., the set of possible alternatives, replaced theory, the set of probable alternatives, and this eventually constrained some ecological theories to tautological formula- tions whose implications are included in the premises, and thus not suitable to experimental contrast.3 This book intends to be useful to a wide range of readers: academic audiences seeking a basic theoretical background on marine pollution, but also pro- fessionals involved in the daily routine of managing the marine environment and seeking applied knowledge related to specific issues on pollution preven- tion, monitoring, effects, and abatement. As a result, the book admits two levels of reading. The advanced reader is offered with a broad selection of specialized scientific references that back the statements made throughout the text, listed at the end of each chapter. For didactic purposes, the learning reader can ignore those references and look for more basic information in the Suggested Further Reading section, and review the essential contents in the Key Ideas section at the end of each chapter. In short, the hopefully not-too-ambitious aim of this book is to provide a rigorous tool to train marine ecotoxicologists and contribute to make them familiar with the contrasted theories and quality-controlled methods that may provide solid scientific foundations to their current or future work. Ricardo Beiras References 1. Windom HL. Contamination of the Marine Environment from Land-based Sources. Marine Pollution Bulletin 1992;25(1e4):32e6. 2. Gray JS. Chapter 17. Risk assessment and management in the exploitation of the seas. In: Calow P, editor. Handbook of environmental risk assessment and management. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 1998. p. 453e74. 3. Peters RH. A critique for ecology. Cambridge University Press; 1991. xiv Foreword
- 10. Acknowledgments I thank my colleagues Marion Nipper, Paula Sánchez Marín, Juan Bellas, Inés Viana, Filipe M.G. Laranjeiro, Miren B. Urrutia, Enrique Navarro, Silvia Messinetti, Leo Mantilla, Iria Durán, and Leticia Vidal Liñán for their useful comments and discussion on several parts of this book. Many ancient and hardly available bibliographic references were readily obtained thanks to the efficient work of the librarians at the University of Vigo. I apologize to Leticia, Xulia, Roi, and Valentina for the time taken for this project. xv
- 11. Abbreviations and Symbols 4-MBC 4-Methylbenzylidene camphor ABS Alkyl-benzene sulfonate AChE Acetylcholinesterase AE Absorption efficiency/assimilation efficiency AF Assessment factor AhR Aryl hydrocarbon receptor ALA-D d-Aminolevulinic acid dehydratase Ant Anthracene ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment Conservation Council ASP Amnesic shellfish poison ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATP Adenosine triphosphate AVS Acid-volatile sulfide BaA Benzo-a-Anthracene BAC Background Assessment Concentration BAF Bioamplification Factor BaP Benzo-a-pyrene BbF Benzo-b-Fluoranthene BC Background concentration BCF Bioconcentration factor BDE Brominated diphenylether BeP Benzo-e-Pyrene BEWS Biological Early Warning System BghiP Benzo-g,h,i-Perylene BkF Benzo-k-Fluoranthene BMF Biomagnification factor BMFTW Trophic web biomagnification factor BOD Biological oxygen demand BOD5 5-days biological oxygen demand BODL Ultimate biological oxygen demand BP Benzophenone BPA Bisphenol A (Continued) xvii
- 12. BTEX Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene CAT Catalase CB Chlorinated biphenyl CBB Critical body burden CCME Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment cDNA Complementary deoxyribonucleic acid CEMP Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme CEP Caribbean Environment Programme CF Contamination factor CFU Colony-forming units Chry Chrysene CLC Civil liability convention COD Chemical oxygen demand CPI Chemical pollution index Cpn60 Chaperon 60 CYP Cytochrome P450 Cys Cysteine DDD Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane DDE Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane DEHP Diethylhexyl phthalate DIN Dissolved inorganic nitrogen DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid DO Dissolved oxygen DOC Dissolved organic carbon DOM Dissolved organic matter DW Dry weight EC European Commission EC50 Median effective concentration ECHA European Chemicals Agency EDC Endocrine disrupting compound EEA European Environment Agency EF Enrichment factor EHMC Ethylhexyl methoxycinnamate ELISA Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay ELS Early life stages EMSA European Maritime Safety Agency EPA Environmental Protection Agency EQC Environmental quality criteria EQC/S Environmental quality criteria and standards EQR Ecological quality ratio EQS Environmental quality standards xviii Abbreviations and Symbols
- 13. ER Estrogen receptor ERA Ecological risk assessment ERL Effects range low ERM Effects range median EROD Ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase EU European Union FC Fecal coliforms FIAM Free ion activity model fL Weight proportion of lipids Flu Fluoranthene fOC Weight proportion of organic carbon FR Filtering rate GPx Glutathione peroxydase GSH Glutathione GST Glutathione transferase HBCD Hexabromocyclododecane HC5 Hazard concentration for 5% of species HELCOM Helsinki Commission HRA Health risk assessment HS Shannon diversity index ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea IF Interaction factor IFREMER Institut Français de Recherche pour l’Exploitation de la Mer IMO International Maritime Organization IOPC International oil pollution compensation IPy Indenepyrene IR Ingestion rate ISO International Organization for Standardization KOC Organic carbon-water partition coefficient KOW Octanol-water partition coefficient LAS Linear alkylbenzene sulfonate LC50 Median lethal concentration LMS Lysosomal membrane stability LW Lipid weight MDS Multidimensional scaling MeeHg Methylmercury MFO Mixed function oxidase or monooxygenase MLVSS Mixed liquor volatile suspended solids MPN Most probable number mRNA Messenger ribonucleic acid MSFD Marine strategy framework directive MSW Municipal solid waste (Continued) xix Abbreviations and Symbols
- 14. MT Metallothionein NADH Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide NADPH Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate NOAA National oceanic and atmospheric administration NP Nonylphenol NPE Nonylphenol ethoxylate NRRT Neutral red retention time NSP Neurotoxic shellfish poison OC Organochlorine OD-PABA Octyl dimethyl-paraaminobenzoic acid OPA Oil pollution act OSPAR OsloeParis commission PA Polyamide PAH Polyaromatic hydrocarbon PBDE Polybrominateddiphenylethers PBT Persistent bioaccumulable toxic PC Polycarbonate PCA Principal components analysis PCB Polychlorinatedbiphenyls PCDD Polychlorinateddibenzo-p-dioxins PCDF Polychlorinateddibenzofurans PCR Polymerase chain reaction PE Polyethylene PEC Predicted environmental concentration PEL Probable effect level PET Polyethylene terephthalate PFOA Perfluorooctanoic acid PFOS Perfluorooctane sulfonate PFOSA Perfluorooctane sulfonamide PFU Plaque-forming units Phe Phenanthrene PLA Polylactic acid PNEC Predicted no-effect concentration PNR Proportion net response POM Particulate organic matter POP Persistent organic pollutant PS Polystyrene PSP Paralytic shellfish poison PP Polypropylene PUR Polyurethane PVC Polyvinyl chloride Pyr Pyrene xx Abbreviations and Symbols
- 15. Visit https://ebookmass.com today to explore a vast collection of ebooks across various genres, available in popular formats like PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading experience and effortlessly download high- quality materials in just a few simple steps. Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that let you access a wealth of knowledge at the best prices!
- 16. QA Quality assurance QC Quality control QSAR Quantitative structure-activity relationship R Risk quotient RBC Rotating biological contactor RDA Redundancy analysis REACH Registration, evaluation, authorization, and restriction of chemicals RNA Ribonucleic acid RNO Réseau National d’Observation ROCCH Réseau d’Observation de la Contamination Chimique ROS Reactive oxygen species RPLI Relative penis length index RT-PCR Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction RTR Ratio to reference S Species richness SARA Saturated, aromatics, resins, asphaltenes SDS Sodium dodecylsulfate SEM Simultaneously extracted metals SER Smooth endoplasmic reticulum SET Sea-urchin embryo test SOD Superoxide dismutase SQC Sediment quality criteria SS Suspended solids SSD Species sensitivity distribution SW Seawater T1/2 Environmental half-life T90 90% die-off time TBT Tributyl-tin TC Total coliforms TCDD 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin TCEP Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate TCPP Tris(chloropropyl) phosphate TCS Triclosan TDCPP Tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl)phosphate TEL Threshold effect level TL Trophic level TOC Total organic carbon TPM Total particulate matter TSCA Toxic substances control act TT Toxicity threshold TTF Trophic transfer factor TU Toxic units (Continued) xxi Abbreviations and Symbols
- 17. UDP Uridine diphosphate UDPGT Uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase UK United Kingdom UN United Nations UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea UNEP United Nations Environment Program US United States UV Ultraviolet radiation VDSI Vas deferens sequence index VTG Vitellogenin WFD Water framework directive WHO World Health Organization WOE Weight of evidence WQC Water quality criteria WW Wet weight WWTP Wastewater treatment plant xxii Abbreviations and Symbols
- 18. CHAPTER 1 Basic Concepts 1.1 POLLUTION, AN ANTHROPOGENIC PROCESS We normally understand as pollution the unwanted presence in the environ- ment of diverse classes of toxic substances generated by human activities. As we will soon discuss, because of the main circulation pathways of matter in the environment, those inputs frequently end up in the sea. In the context of marine science, a more formal definition provided by a United Nations advi- sory board, though strongly anthropocentric, was very successful and quoted in the scientific literature. Marine pollution, according to that group of experts, is “the introduction by man of substances into the marine environment resulting in such deleterious effects as harm to living resources, hazards to human health, hindrance to marine activities including fishing, impairment of quality for use of seawater and reduction of amenities” (GESAMP 1969).1 Latter developments of this definition added the introduction of energy to make clear that heat and radioactivity, already contemplated in the original definition, could also be considered pollutants, and specified that the introduc- tion into the sea might also be indirect via riverine or atmospheric pathways. In the context of maritime transportation, the same board2 produced a list of 166 substances of major concern (Category 1), and their escape into the marine environment should universally be prevented because they may cause long-term or permanent damage, and 231 additional substances (Category 2) that because of their short-term effects represented a hazard only in certain scenarios. From this seminal report stems the many lists of so-called priority pollutants subse- quently identified by agencies and institutions committed to environmental pro- tection worldwide. The first aspect inherent to pollution thus is its human origin, i.e., pollution is an anthropogenic process derived from human activities. Climatic, geological, or oceanographic natural events (floods, earthquakes, red tides, etc.), even when they can be extremely harmful for the environment, are specifically excluded from the definition of pollution. Therefore, it is not surprising that the most polluted places were those supporting the highest human population A formal definition of marine pollution Pollution is quantitatively related to population density and energy consumption Marine Pollution. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813736-9.00001-5 Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 3
- 19. densities. But not all human societies pollute the same. Since many physical and chemical pollutants are originated by industrial activities, industrialization is also quantitatively related to pollution. A good quantitative subrogate for the degree of industrialization is energy consumption. As illustrated in Fig. 1.1, the per capita energy consumption may be up to two orders of magnitude higher in industrialized societies compared to rural ones. According to this source, the average American consumes approximately twice the energy than a person from Europe, 10 times that of a person from India, and 100 times that of a person from South Sudan. Another societal factor affecting the environmental impact of its inhabitants is environmental awareness, which is directly related to the cultural level. This issue has been much less explored and quantified but can be illustrated by a FIGURE 1.1 Per capita energy consumption in the world in 2013. Units are Kg of oil equivalents per person and year. Data source: World Bank. Environmental regulations are more strict in developed countries 4 CHAPTER 1: Basic Concepts
- 20. few examples. Environmentalism was borne in the most developed countries, and under its influence environmental protection regulations are far stricter in those countries. This translates into the fact that many chemicals that cause environmental concern and were banned in the most developed countries, such as persistent organochlorine pesticides, are still used in other parts of the world with laxer environmental standards. In 2002 the world’s largest mercury mine (Almadén, Spain) was closed as a result of the different restrictions imposed by the European Commission to the use of this metal in thermometers and many other applications. Currently the global mercury production is largely dominated by China, and 79% of global Hg emissions are located in Asia, Africa, and South America.3 Another illustration of that is the export of waste from electronic equipment originated in industrialized European countries to West Africa and other underdeveloped countries, giving rise there to the uncontrolled and unhealthy “e-waste” graveyards. PHOTOGRAPH 1.1 Landfill of electronic equipments and other discarded appliances from all over the world in Accra (West Africa). Photograph: Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3049457/Where-computer- goes-die-Shocking-pictures-toxic-electronic-graveyards-Africa-West-dumps-old-PCs-laptops- microwaves-fridges-phones.html). 5 1.1 Pollution, an Anthropogenic Process
- 21. In short, for a given geographical region, a conceptual model can express pollu- tion (P) as a function of human population density (N), directly related to the degree of industrialization (i), and inversely related to cultural level (c): P ¼ N i c (Eq. 1.1) An interesting implication follows; pollution effects cannot be quantitatively reduced in a scenario of continuous industrial development and population growth. The second aspect inherent to the formal definition of pollution is the delete- rious effects caused, either to the environment or directly to people. If pollu- tion became an issue in developed societies it is because it deteriorates the natural environment, impairs its utility for humankind, and even poses a risk to human health. We are now used to car traffic restrictions in the large cit- ies caused by excessive levels of atmospheric particles, or beaches closed to swimming due to detectable inputs of fecal waters. Accidental spillages or chronic chemical pollution render some fisheries commercially valueless because of accumulation of toxic substances in the animals. However, in most instances the deleterious effects of contaminants are more subtle. Due to factors such as environmental persistence, continuous input, chronic effects, or trophic transfer, the manifestation of the harmful effects can be largely delayed in time and space, and a direct link between input of a substance in the environment and measurable deleterious effects on living organisms is nor- mally difficult to establish. Some authors advocated a formal distinction between pollutant (or pollu- tion) and contaminant (or contamination), the latter not necessarily harmful. Walker et al.4 identify at least three difficulties with this distinction. First, harm is related to dose and not an inherent property of a substance. Sec- ond, there is no general agreement about what constitutes environmental harm or damage. For example, concerning ecological effects, the changes in ecosystem structure and functioning caused by pollutants may be perceived as deleterious or not depending on the perspective. A large anthropogenic input of organic matter in an estuary may cause hypereutrophication and replacement of sensitive by tolerant benthic species. Biodiversity may be reduced but some commercially exploitable species may proliferate and the ecosystem may become more productive. Third, pollution has been tradition- ally assessed by measuring chemical concentrations, and corresponding biological effects are seldom known. Therefore, the distinction between pollution and contamination is not useful in theoretical nor in applied science. Pollution implies deleterious effects 6 CHAPTER 1: Basic Concepts
- 22. 1.2 CLASSIFICATIONS OF POLLUTANTS ACCORDING TO ORIGIN AND PERSISTENCE Until the late 19th or early 20th century, waste disposal practices in the Western world, in contrast with the progress made by Eastern civilizations in ancient times, were fully careless, and turned the Thames or Seine rivers into open sewers transmitting cholera and many other infectious diseases. Even the in- habitants of the largest European cities got rid of their urine and feces at best through pipes draining on the street or more frequently straight through the window. The Spanish expression “aguava!,” warning away the window because of that, is still remembered by older generations. The generalization of sewerage systems simply applied the dilution principle to solve the problem and transferred the contaminants to larger and more distant water bodies. As reflected in the motto: “dilution is the solution to pollution,” physical dispersal was generally accepted as waste management strategy until a partic- ular kind of pollutants entered the scene. In 1962 Rachel Carson published Silent spring, an influential book that put the focus on the persistent chemical pollutants that rather than diluting and disappearing in the environment accu- mulated into the birds and caused them unexpected side-effects such as repro- ductive failure. Advanced societies grew aware of the dangers posed by chemicals freely disposed in the environment, including risks to human health. Only when environmental concerns rose worldwide from the 1960s on did waste treatment and pollution abatement become priority issues in the politi- cal agendas. Many persistent pollutants have been found to accumulate in organisms at con- centrations orders of magnitude above those found in their physical environ- ment, a phenomena termed bioconcentration or bioaccumulation, dealt with in Chapter 11. Bioconcentration factor (BCF) is the ratio between the concen- tration in the organism and the concentration in its environment. According to most regulations, a substance is considered as bioaccumulative if its BCF ex- ceeds a limit between 2000 and 5000. Environmental persistence and accumu- lation in the organisms challenge dilution as an effective strategy against pollution and stress the need for reduction of industrial use and environmental disposal of the so-called PBT substances, from persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic. Considering the broad definition of pollution explained earlier in the chapter, no universal method of pollution control is available, and the different charac- teristics and sources will require different management approaches. Pollution is immediately associated to chemicals, but according to their nature, pollutants can be classified into physical (heat and radioactivity, light, noise, particles, Ancient civilizations already used water to get rid of waste Persistence and accumulation challenge dilution as an effective strategy against pollution Pollutants can be of physical, chemical, or biological nature . 7 1.2 Classifications of Pollutants According to Origin and Persistence
- 23. plastic objects), chemical, and biological (pathogen microorganisms trans- mitted from fecal waters; see Chapter 4) pollutants. According to the source, we can first make the difference between urban, agri- culture, and industrial waste, and each of them can be classified into solid or liquid waste. Thus, solid urban waste, for instance, is specifically managed sepa- rately from other types of more dangerous solid wastes such as those of indus- trial origin not suitable for recycling or reutilization and that may require more careful disposal practices. Similarly, urban effluents are currently treated in wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), normally not designed to receive indus- trial wastewaters containing toxicants that would spoil the biological treatment of the WWTP. Generally speaking, the more we could separate different wastes the more efficient will be their treatment. Another useful classification attends at the environmental persistence of the contaminants. Dissipating pollutants are those that rapidly lose their damaging properties once released into the aquatic environment. Any potential effects are thus only local, and physical dispersion, instantaneous chemical re- action, or rapid biological uptake solves the problem. Heat (cooling water from power and nuclear stations), acids and alkalis, or cyanide are examples of this type of contaminants. Nitrates and phosphates are also quickly depleted from the environment by plant or microbial activity, and thus can also be classified within this category. Biodegradable pollutants are those susceptible of biological oxidation and eventual mineralization to CO2, reduced nitrogenous and phosphorus, and water under environmental conditions. Natural organic compounds, including oil, are all biodegradable because bacteria and fungi have evolved to obtain en- ergy from virtually every natural molecule, but the degradation rates and hence environmental persistence may be very different, and in practice some types of natural organic matter such as lignin or humic substances can be considered as persistent. Environmental conditions such as temperature, oxygen availability, and microbial flora may greatly affect degradation rates. Persistent or conservative pollutants are those not very chemically reactive and not readily subject to microbial attack either. Halogenated hydrocarbons, synthetic polymers, radioactive isotopes, and trace metals fall within this class. Conventionally, a contaminant is considered as environmentally persistent when its half-life is in the order of months or even years. Environmental persis- tence, as already stated, depends on phisic-chemical and microbiological prop- erties of the environmental compartment, and hence half-life values must always be indicated for a particular set of environmental conditions, a require- ment not always fulfilled in regulatory studies. According to several American and European regulations,5 a substance is considered as persistent if its half- life in marine water is higher than 60 days, or higher than 180 days in marine . or dissipating, degradable, or persistent according to their environmental life 8 CHAPTER 1: Basic Concepts
- 24. sediment. Examples of persistent substances according to these criteria are diuron, lindane, polybrominated diphenyl-ethers, or polyfluorinated plastic additives. 1.3 IS AN ECOSYSTEM POLLUTED? A FIRST SCIENTIFIC ANSWER: BACKGROUND CONCENTRATION AND ENRICHMENT FACTOR Moving on to practical issues, one is immediately interested in assessing pollu- tion and answering the question whether a particular ecosystem is polluted or not. Apart from the two common traits of anthropogenic origin and potential harmful effects, little more is common to the wide range of processes labeled as “environmental pollution.” In fact the question of whether or not an ecosystem is polluted is very difficult to answer if we are not more specific, since different kinds of pollutants according to their physical nature, persistence, or type of source may require very different techniques of assessment and pose very different levels of risk depending on the kind of organisms, including humans, potentially affected. For example, sewage waters may pose a high risk to human health because of microbial pathogens but be innocuous or even beneficial for the ecosystem production because of organic enrichment, whereas a potent chemical herbicide may pose imminent risk to primary producers while being innocuous to humans or perhaps beneficial for biodiversity in a hypereutro- phic ecosystem. We thus should always pose questions such as, Is this ecosystem polluted by .? to define the scientific tools capable to give an answer to the question and, if needed, implement the correct management tools for its abatement. Once the type of pollution is defined, and provided the pollutant was a natural substance, the degree of pollution may be assessed by comparison of the cur- rent levels of the substance in the environment with those corresponding to pristine areas not subjected to strong human pressure. Within the field of aquatic sediments this approach was pioneered by Hakanson,6 who proposed an index of contamination for each site based on the summation for all the sub- stances measured of the rates between the mean measured concentration (C) and the background concentration (BC), or reference value, defined as “the standard preindustrial reference level.” The BC can be measured in sam- ples from pristine areas of similar mineralogical composition or in deeper layers of the sediment corresponding to preindustrial times. The ratio C/BC has been later termed enrichment factor. Different types of pollution require different methods of assessment Preindustrial levels of chemicals are called background 9 1.3 Is an Ecosystem Polluted? A First Scientific Answer
- 25. This approach is not applicable for synthetic substances, for which the back- ground level should be zero. Besides, the search for pristine areas is nowadays difficult, and requires resorting to very remote sites or historical data. Faced with these problems, the OSPAR Commission has established for common chemical pollutants background assessment concentrations (BAC), which are statistical tools derived from BC data that enable testing of whether observed concentrations can be considered to be near BCs.7 The BAC, though derived from purely chemical data bases with no ecotoxicological informa- tion included, are an example of a useful concept in environmental management that will be discussed in Section 1.5: the environmental quality criteria. 1.4 POLLUTION IMPLIES A DELETERIOUS EFFECT: TOXICITY TESTS AND ECOTOXICOLOGICAL BIOASSAYS Once we have set a suitable background level for our study area, an issue far from simple, and calculated an enrichment factor for the chemical pollutant of concern, we face a problem that chemistry is no longer capable to solve. Are those enrichment factors posing a risk to the native organisms or human populations? How can we know whether a given concentration of a chemical in an environmental compartment may be harmful? This question can only be answered by means of biological tools allowing the establishment of quan- titative relationships between the levels of pollutants and their harmful biolog- ical effects. This issue can be addressed a priori, in the laboratory, with toxicity tests dosing known amounts of individual substances or combinations of substances on biological models, and recording biological responses at molecular, cellular, organismic, or micro- and mesocosm levels, or a posteriori, either in the labora- tory exposing our biological models to known dilutions of environmental sam- ples in ecotoxicological bioassays, or in the field, studying biomarkers and ecological indices of communities in the sites affected by the pollutants (see also Fig. 17.1). Therefore, the potential harm that pollution may cause on native organisms from affected sites can be the subject of prospective studies, aimed at prevention, and based on laboratory toxicity tests with the chemicals of concern (see Chapter 13), or the subject of retrospective studies conducted once the pollutants have been already discharged into the environment, aiming at the diagnosis of the ecological status of the affected sites. The latter use ecotoxicological bioassays with laboratory species exposed to environmental samples, biomarkers measured in native populations at different levels of Pollution implies a deleterious effect Biological effects can be measured in the laboratory or by field studies 10 CHAPTER 1: Basic Concepts
- 26. Visit https://ebookmass.com today to explore a vast collection of ebooks across various genres, available in popular formats like PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading experience and effortlessly download high- quality materials in just a few simple steps. Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that let you access a wealth of knowledge at the best prices!
- 27. Exploring the Variety of Random Documents with Different Content
- 28. CLUMBER. C LUMBER, the seat of his Grace the Duke of Newcastle, is charmingly situated within about four miles from Worksop, and on the borders of Sherwood Forest. The drive from Worksop, up Sparkin Hill, and so along the highway for the forest, is lovely in the extreme, the road being well wooded on either side, and presenting glimpses of forest scenery that are peculiarly grateful to the eye. Leaving the main road to the left, and entering the grounds by the Lodge, a carriage drive of a mile or more in length through the well-wooded park leads to the mansion, which is at once elegant, picturesque, and “homely.” To it, however, we are only able to devote very brief attention. Clumber is of comparatively modern erection, having been first built in 1770, and received since then many important additions. It has, therefore, no history attached to it. The place was, till about that time, simply a wild tract of forest land, which the then noble duke who planned and carried out the works cleared and cultivated at an enormous outlay, forming the extensive lake at an expense of some £7,000, and erecting the mansion at a princely cost.
- 29. The main feature of the house is its west front, facing the lake: this we have engraved. Its centre is a colonnade, and this gives access to the entrance hall, the oldest portion of the house being a part of the shooting-box, to which magnificent additions have been made. Between the mansion and the lake are the Italian gardens, elegantly laid out in beds of the richest flowers, and well diversified with vases and statuary; in the centre is a fountain of large size (the bowl being nearly thirteen feet in diameter), of white marble and of Italian workmanship. Clumber, West Front. The family of Pelham, which, with that of Clinton, is represented by the Duke of Newcastle, is of considerable antiquity in the county of Hertford, deriving the name from the manor or lordship of Pelham, in that county, which, in the reign of Edward I., belonged to Walter de Pelham. He died in 1292, leaving two sons—William, who died without issue, and Walter, who was succeeded by his son, Thomas de Pelham. John de Pelham, the grandson of this latter, “was a person of great fame in the reign of King Edward III.; and in memory of his valiant acts, his figure, in armour, with the arms of
- 30. the family on his breast, was painted on glass in the Chapter-house at Canterbury, being (’tis probable) a benefactor to the cathedral, or was buried there.” At the battle of Poictiers he shared the glory of taking the French king prisoner with “Lord la Warr, and in memory of so signal an action, and the king’s surrendering his sword to them, Sir Roger la Warr, Lord la Warr, had the crampet or chape of his sword for a badge of that honour, and John de Pelham (afterwards knighted) had the buckle of a belt as a mark of the same honour, which was sometimes used by his descendants as a seal manual, and at others the said buckle on each side a cage, being an emblem of the captivity of the said King of France, and was therefore borne as a crest, as in those times was customary.” The “Pelham buckle” is still the badge of the family. Sir John married Joan, daughter of Vincent Herbert, or Finch, ancestor of the Earls of Winchelsea and Nottingham, and was succeeded by his son, John de Pelham, who was no less famous than his father for many great achievements and honourable exploits. He was Constable of Pevensey Castle, Treasurer to the King, Ambassador to the French King, and held many other important offices, and was knighted. Dying in 1428, Sir John was succeeded by his son, Sir John de Pelham, who also held many offices. He married twice: first, Joan, co-heiress of Sir John d’Escures; and, secondly, Joan de Courcy, by whom he had issue, with others, his son and successor, Sir John de Pelham, who married Alice, daughter of Sir Thomas Lewknor, but died without male issue, when the estates passed to his brother, William de Pelham, who also died without issue, and was succeeded by his brother Thomas. Thomas Pelham was consecutively succeeded by his sons, John and Sir William, the latter of whom married, first, Mary, daughter of Sir Richard Carew; and, secondly, Mary, daughter of William, Lord Sands of the Vine, Lord Chamberlain to Henry VIII. By his first wife he had issue, with others, a son Nicholas, of whom hereafter; and by his second, with others, a son William, who became famous: from him descended the Pelhams of Brocklesby. Sir Nicholas Pelham married Anne Sackville, and, at his death in 1559, was succeeded by his son, Sir John Pelham, who married Judith, daughter of Oliver,
- 31. Lord St. John of Bletsoe, by whom he had a son, Oliver, who died young four years after his father. He was succeeded by Thomas, brother to Sir John, who was created a baronet in 1611. He married Mary, daughter of Sir Thomas Walsingham, and was succeeded by his son, Sir Thomas Pelham, as second baronet, who married three times, and left issue by his first and third wives. The eldest of these was his successor, Sir John Pelham, Bart., who married the Lady Lucy, daughter of the Earl of Leicester, by whom he had a family of three sons and three daughters. He died in 1702-3, and was succeeded by his eldest son, Sir Thomas Pelham, Bart., who, in 1706, was raised to the peerage by the title of Baron Pelham of Laughton, in Sussex. Lord Pelham married, first, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir William Jones, Attorney-General, and, secondly, the Lady Grace Holles, youngest daughter of Gilbert, Earl of Clare, and sister of John Holles, fourth Earl of Clare, created Duke of Newcastle (who had married the Lady Margaret Cavendish, daughter and co-heiress of Henry Cavendish, second Duke of Newcastle), by whom he had issue two sons—Thomas and Henry—and five daughters. He died in 1711-12, and was succeeded by his eldest son, Thomas, as second Baron Pelham. This peer was born in 1693, and by the will of his uncle, John Holles, Duke of Newcastle, “was made his heir, and authorised to bear the name and arms of Holles.” Besides many other important offices, he was made Steward, Keeper, and Warden of the Forest of Sherwood and the Park of Folewood, in the county of Nottingham, and in 1714 was promoted to the dignity of Earl of Clare and Viscount Haughton, with remainder, in default of male issue, to his brother, the Hon. Henry Pelham and his heirs male. In the following year he was created Marquis of Clare and Duke of Newcastle, with the like remainder, and was made a K.G. He married, in 1717, Lady Harriet Godolphin, co-heiress of Lord Godolphin, and granddaughter of John, Duke of Marlborough, but died without issue in 1768. His brother, Henry Pelham, who had married Lady Catherine Manners, daughter of the Duke of Rutland, having also died without surviving
- 32. male issue, the estates and the titles of Duke of Newcastle and Baron Pelham passed to Henry Clinton, ninth Earl of Lincoln, who had married Catherine, daughter of Henry Pelham, and whose mother was the Lady Lucy Pelham, the Earl assuming the name of Pelham in addition to that of Clinton. His grace had issue—Henry Pelham-Clinton, Earl of Lincoln, who died during his father’s lifetime without male issue, and Lord Thomas Pelham-Clinton, who succeeded to the titles and estates. Thomas Pelham-Clinton, third Duke of Newcastle, was born in 1752, and married the Lady Anna Maria Stanhope, daughter of the second Earl of Harrington, and by her had issue two sons and two daughters. He died in 1795, and was succeeded by his eldest son— Henry Pelham Pelham-Clinton, fourth Duke of Newcastle and eleventh Earl of Lincoln, who held many local appointments, and was a man of high attainments. He married, in 1807, Georgiana Elizabeth, daughter of Edward Miller Mundy, Esq., of Shipley Hall, Derbyshire, and by her had issue five daughters—viz. the Ladies Anna Maria, Georgiana, Charlotte, Caroline Augusta, and Henrietta— and six sons, viz. Henry Pelham, Earl of Lincoln (who succeeded him), and Lords Charles Pelham, Thomas Charles Pelham, William, Edward, and Robert Renebald. His grace died in 1864, and was succeeded by his eldest son— Henry Fiennes Pelham-Clinton, as fifth duke. This nobleman was born in 1811, and, as Earl of Lincoln, represented South Nottinghamshire and the Falkirk burghs in Parliament. His grace, who was a man of the highest integrity, was the confidential friend of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales (who visited Clumber in 1861), was successively Lord Warden of the Stannaries, Chief Secretary for Ireland, Secretary of State for the Colonies, and Secretary of State for War. He married, in 1832, the Lady Susan Harriet Catherine, daughter of the tenth Duke of Hamilton (which marriage was dissolved in 1850, the Duchess in 1860 being married to M. Opdebeck, of Brussels), and by her had issue three sons and one daughter. These were—the present duke (of whom directly); Lord Edward William Pelham-Clinton, born in 1836, married to Matilda,
- 33. daughter of Sir W. E. Cradock-Hartopp, Bart.; Lord Arthur Pelham- Clinton, M.P., born 1840, who died in 1870; Lord Albert Sydney Pelham-Clinton, born in 1845, and married to Frances Evelyn, widow of Captain E. Stotherd; and the late Lady Susan Charlotte Catherine Pelham-Clinton, born in 1839, married to Lord Adolphus Frederick Charles William Vane-Tempest, son of the third Marquis of Londonderry. The present head of this illustrious house, Henry Pelham Alexander Pelham-Clinton, sixth Duke of Newcastle, of Newcastle- under-Lyme, and thirteenth Earl of Lincoln, was born in 1834, and educated at Eton and at Christ Church, Oxford. He sat, when Earl of Lincoln, for Newark, and was attached to Lord Grenville’s mission to Russia in 1856. In 1861 his grace married Henrietta Adela, only daughter of the late Henry Thomas Hope, Esq., of Deepdene, Surrey, and Castle Blaney, county Monaghan (by his wife, the Hon. Gertrude Elphinstone, daughter of the fourteenth Lord Elphinstone), by whom he has issue living—Henry Pelham Archibald Douglas, Earl of Lincoln, born in 1864; Lord Henry Francis Hope Pelham-Clinton, born in 1866; the Lady Beatrice Adeline Pelham-Clinton, born in 1862; and the Lady Emily Augusta Mary Pelham-Clinton, born in 1863. The arms of the Duke of Newcastle are—quarterly, first and fourth argent, six cross-crosslets, three, two, and one, sable, on a chief, azure, two mullets pierced, or, for Clinton; second and third, the two coats of Pelham, quarterly, viz. first and fourth azure, three pelicans vulning themselves, argent, second and third gules, two pieces of belts with buckles erect, in pale, the buckles upwards, argent (being an augmentation in commemoration of the part Sir William Pelham took in the capture of the French king at the battle of Poictiers). Crests—first, out of a ducal coronet, gules, a plume of five ostrich feathers, argent, banded azure, for Clinton; second, a peacock in pride, proper, for Pelham. Supporters—two greyhounds, argent, plain collared and lined, gules. His grace is patron of ten livings—viz. Worksop, Shireoaks, Cromwell, Elksley, Bothansall, Brinsley, Markham Clinton, East Markham, Kirton, and Mapplebeck.
- 34. It will not be necessary to describe minutely any of the apartments of this “Home” of the Newcastles—Clumber. The house has been said, very absurdly, to be “a second Chatsworth,” and that “it embraces magnificence and comfort more than any other nobleman’s mansion in England;” but it is not so. It is a noble mansion, some of its rooms being characterized by great elegance and beauty, and by pureness of taste, while others are of a more mediocre character. To some of the apartments and their contents we proceed to direct attention. The Entrance Hall, with an arcade supporting its ceiling, contains, among other works of Art, a semi-colossal statue of Napoleon, which has usually been ascribed to Canova, but has also, with reason, been stated to be Franzoni’s reproduction of Chaudet’s great work: it was purchased at Carrara, in 1823, by the then Duke of Newcastle. In the same hall, besides others, are Bailey’s statue of the poet Thomson, a fine figure of Paris, and busts of the Duke of Newcastle by Nollekens, Sir Robert Peel, Cromwell, Verschaffer’s Triton and Dolphins, c. The Library, perhaps the finest apartment in the mansion, is a noble room, of large size and lofty proportions, and fitted in a style of great magnificence. The geometric ceiling is richly decorated, and around the upper part of the room is a light and elegant gallery. Besides the choice collections of rare old books, and those of more modern times, which are arranged round the walls of the Library and the Reading-room (to which access is gained by a lofty arch springing from pilasters of the composite order), they contain Sir R. Westmacott’s noble statue of Euphrosyne, Bailey’s Thetis and Achilles, many good bronzes, and an assemblage of objects of virtu. From the windows of these rooms fine views of the Grounds, the Park, and the Lake are obtained. The State Dining-room, an elegant apartment, has a richly decorated geometric ceiling and a recessed buffet, the recess being formed by well-proportioned Corinthian columns. The rich cornice, the gilt festoons that adorn the walls, the mirrors between the windows, the antique Venetian crystal-glass chandelier and side
- 35. lights, and the silver-gilt service on the buffets give a sumptuous air to the room, while the four magnificent Snyders, and the other fine old paintings which adorn the walls, add materially to its beauty. The principal Drawing-room, hung with satin damask, and the furniture of the most costly and elegant character, is a noble apartment, and contains, besides Lawrence’s portraits of the fourth Duke of Newcastle and his duchess, good examples of the Carracci, Vandyke, Castiglione, and others; while in the Crimson Drawing- room are pictures by Rembrandt, Rubens, Poussin, Guido Reni, and Canaletti. The Grand Staircase, with its iron-work railing, originally described as being “curiously wrought and gilt in the shape of crowns, with tassels hanging down between them from cords twisted in knots and festoons,” has stained-glass windows, and is enriched with a number of portraits and other paintings. Among the portraits are Pitt, Thomson, Scott, Southey, Campbell, King George II., Queen Caroline, Prince Rupert, Dante, Cowley, and Hatton; and among the other paintings are examples of Snyders, Westall, Van Oss, Andrea Sacchi, Lely, Shackleton, Diepenbeck, and others. The other apartments—the Breakfast-room, Billiard-room, Smoking-rooms, Ante-rooms, and what not—as well as the bed- room suites, are mostly elegant in their fittings, convenient in their appointments, and replete with choice works of Art. We, however, pass them over, simply remarking that among these Art treasures are striking examples of Gainsborough (the “Beggar Boys”), Gerard Douw, Poussin, Borgognone, Neefs, Van der Meulin, Carlo Dolce (the “Marriage of St. Catherine”), Vandyke, Titian, Rembrandt, Breughel, Ruysdael, Teniers, Lely, Rubens (his wife), Andrea del Sarto, Salvator Rosa, Claude Lorraine, Wouvermans, Hogarth (portraits of himself and wife), Reynolds, Jansen, Holbein, Van Loo, Creswick, Dahl, Domenichino, Dobson, Rigaud, Cranach, Kneller, and others. Many of these are gems of Art of a high order of excellence.
- 36. At Clumber, too, are preserved four highly interesting Roman sepulchral altars, which were thus described by the Rev. Archdeacon Trollope, with the accompanying engravings:[53]—“No. 1 bears the following inscription on the two small front panels: m. caedici . favsti . negotiator . de . sacra . via . caedicia . syntyche . conliberta—one that is interesting as bearing reference to a tradesman of the celebrated Via Sacra at Rome. The birds pecking at a basket of fruit between them would seem to claim a Christian origin for this work of Art, had not the ox’s head and pendent sacrificial garland in addition to the heads at the angles—apparently of Jupiter Ammon—pointed to heathenism; the garland intermixed with birds, below the inscription, is both rich and graceful. No. 2 rises from an enriched plinth, bearing, first, on the pediment of its coped lid, the inscription: d. m. m. ivni . ivniani, and, on a panel below, d. m. antonia . tarentina . conivgi . bene . merenti . fecit, forming a short but affectionate epitaph from a wife to a husband, worthy in these respects of modern imitation. Four masks are placed at the corners of the lid, and on another part of the lid appears a boar, for which animal Tarentum was famous. The figures sculptured in front perhaps represent one of the funereal games. No. 3 is a well-designed coped urn, both its form and details having received much careful attention. Within a long panel, surrounded by an enriched moulding, is the inscription, ti . ivlio . felici . manneia . trepteetti . ivlivs . philonicvs . heredes . fecervnt. No. 4 is a longer and lower urn than the others, having two small panels prepared for inscriptions, which never appear to have been filled up.
- 37. Small fanciful pillars, or candelabra, surmounted by birds, form the angles of the urn, from which depend rich garlands of fruit.” Adjoining the mansion, but apart from it, is the unfinished Chapel —a design of much elegance, the work of Messrs. Hine, of Nottingham—which forms a prominent and pleasing feature from the grounds and lake. It consists of a nave and chancel, with chancel- screen and semicircular apse, and has on its north side an organ loft, and on its south a sacristy; and it has an elegant bell-turret and spire. The Pleasure-grounds of Clumber are very extensive, and laid out with much taste. The terrace, which runs along by the lake, is of
- 38. vast length, and is beautifully diversified with statuary, vases, lovely beds of flowers, and shrubs and trees; from it flights of steps lead down to the lake, and other steps give access to the Italian Gardens. A great feature of the grounds is the enormous size and singular growth of the cedars: some of these are said to be unsurpassed in England both for their girth and for their magnificently picturesque and venerable appearance. Some of the conifers, too, are of extraordinary size and beauty. The Kitchen Gardens are extensive and well arranged, and the Park well stocked. The Lake is one of the glories of Clumber. It is a splendid sheet of water, covering some eighty or ninety acres of ground, and beautifully diversified on its banks with woods of tall forest trees and rich verdant glades. On the bosom of the Lake rest two ships—one a fine three-master, forming a striking feature in the view. The neighbourhood of Clumber is rich in places of interest and in lovely localities;[54] and its near proximity to Sherwood Forest— indeed, it is itself a part of that forest reclaimed—to Thoresby, to Hardwick Wood, to Welbeck, to Osberton, to Worksop and its manor, to Bilhagh, to Rufford, and to a score of other inviting localities, renders it one of the pleasantest, most desirable, and most enjoyable of “Homes.”
- 39. WELBECK. W ELBECK, which we have chosen as the subject of our present chapter, has a history, a character, an appearance, and an interest that are entirely and peculiarly its own. In its external character it differs very materially in many points from any other mansion yet built; while its internal arrangements and means of access from one part to another are so original, and so entirely distinct from what has anywhere else been adopted, as at once to prove its noble owner, his Grace the Duke of Portland, by whom it has been planned, and is being carried out, to be a man of enlarged mind, of princely ideas, of noble conceptions, of high engineering skill, and of great constructive ability. It is a place, as we have said, entirely to itself, by itself, and of itself; it is a place many of whose features, both in general plan and in minute detail, might with advantage be taken as examples for others to follow. Vying in extent with some of the largest mansions of the kingdom, Welbeck cannot, like them, be all seen on the surface, for many of its noblest and grandest features, and much of the finest and most complicated parts of its constructive skill, are hidden away from the general observer, and only flash upon him as brilliant
- 40. creations of genius when he is permitted to approach them by descending into the “bowels of the earth;” then, and then only, does the magnificence of the design of the noble owner become apparent, and then only does the vastness of the work become manifest. But of these features we shall speak presently; first let us say a few words upon its past history and the changes it has undergone. Welbeck, West Front and Oxford Wing. Welbeck, with its broad domain, is situated in Nottinghamshire, about four miles from Worksop, and close to the borders of the county of Derby. Its parks are one grand succession of fine old forest trees, and its herds of deer—for it has its herd of white deer, its herd of fallow deer, and its separate herds of red and other deer—are of great extent and of fine and noble quality. Before the Conquest Welbeck was held by the Saxon Sweyn, but afterwards it passed to the Flemangs as part of the manor of Cuckney. By Thomas de Cuckney (grandson of Joceus de Flemang) the Abbey was founded, and here, in the reign of Henry II., he planted a settlement of
- 41. Præemonstratensian or White Canons from Newhouse, in Lincolnshire, the first house in which they were established in England. The Abbey was dedicated to St. James, and endowed with grants of lands. These were from time to time considerably augmented, and “in 1329 the Bishop of Ely bought the whole of the manor of Cuckney, and settled it upon the Abbey on condition of their finding eight canons who should enjoy the good things and pray for Edward the Third and his queen, their children and ancestors, c.; also for the bishop’s father and mother, brother, c.; ‘but especially for the health of the said lord bishop whilst he lived, and after his death for his soul, and for all theirs that had faithfully served him or done him any good;’ to which was added this extraordinary injunction, that they should observe his anniversary, and on their days of commemorating the dead ‘should absolve his soul by name;’ a process whose frequent repetition might naturally be considered as needless, unless the pious bishop supposed that he might perhaps commit a few additional sins whilst in purgatory.” In 1512, it is stated, the Abbey at Welbeck was made the head of the order. At the dissolution it was granted to Richard Whalley, and later on, after other changes, passed to Sir Charles Cavendish, of whom we shall speak presently. By him the Abbey was converted into a noble mansion, but little of the original religious house being left standing, and these parts only used as cellars, or here and there a wall, for the new building. The present mansion is said to have been commenced in 1604, and was afterwards much altered and enlarged, the riding-house being built in 1623, and the stables two years afterwards, from the designs of John Smithson. By the late Duke of Portland many alterations in the mansion were effected, and the grounds were also much improved. We have just alluded to Sir Charles Cavendish, and this leads us on to the consideration of the descent of the estates from his time down to that of the present noble owner, and enables us to give, as is our wont, a genealogical account of the great and important families to whom Welbeck has belonged. The family of Cavendish, as already more fully detailed in our account of Chatsworth, traces back
- 42. to the Conquest, when Robert de Gernon, who came over with the Conqueror, so distinguished himself in arms that he was rewarded with grants of land in Hertfordshire, Gloucestershire, c. His descendants held considerable lands in Derbyshire, and Sir William Gernon obtained a grant of a fair at Bakewell, in that county. He had two sons—Sir Ralph de Gernon, Lord of Bakewell, and Geoffrey de Gernon, of Moor Hall, near Bakewell. From the second of these, Geoffrey de Gernon, the Cavendishes descend. His son, Roger de Gernon (who died in 1334), married the heiress of John Potton, or Potkins, lord of the manor of Cavendish, in Suffolk, and by her had issue four sons, who all assumed the name of Cavendish from their mother’s manor. These were—Sir John Cavendish, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench in the time of Edward III., and Chancellor of Cambridge, 4th of Richard II., who was beheaded by the insurgents of Suffolk in that reign; Roger Cavendish, from whom descended the celebrated navigator, Sir Thomas Cavendish; Stephen Cavendish, Lord Mayor, member of Parliament, and Sheriff of London; and Richard Cavendish. Sir John married Alice, daughter of Sir John Odyngseles, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, who brought to her husband the manor of Cavendish-Overhall, and by her, who died before him, had issue two sons—Andrew and John—and a daughter, Alice, married to William Nell. Sir Andrew Cavendish, the eldest son, was Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk. By his wife, Rose, he left issue one son, William, from whom the estate passed to his cousin. Sir Andrew was succeeded by his brother, Sir John Cavendish, Esquire of the Body to Richard II. and Henry V., who, for his gallant conduct in killing Wat Tyler, in his conflict with Sir William Walworth, was knighted by Richard II. in Smithfield, and an annuity of £40 per annum granted to him and his sons for ever. He was also made Broiderer of the Wardrobe to the King. He married Joan, daughter of Sir William Clopton, of Clopton, in Suffolk, and by her had issue three sons—William, his successor; Robert, serjeant-at-law; and Walter. William Cavendish, who was a citizen and mercer of London, and of Cavendish-Overhall, married Joan Staventon, by whom he had two sons—Thomas and William. This Thomas Cavendish, who was of Cavendish and Pollingford, in Suffolk, married Katharine
- 43. Arms of Cavendish. Scudamore, and left by her, as son and heir, Sir Thomas Cavendish, who, having studied the law, was employed by Thomas, Earl of Surrey, Treasurer of the King’s Exchequer. He was also Clerk of the Pipe in the Exchequer to Henry VIII. He married twice, and left, by his first wife, Alice, daughter and co-heiress of John Smith, of Podbroke Hall, besides other issue, three sons—George Cavendish, Sir William Cavendish, and Sir Thomas Cavendish. George Cavendish, the eldest of these three sons, was of Glemsford and Cavendish-Overhall, and is said to have been the author of “Cavendish’s Life of Wolsey,” although the authorship of that work has also been attributed to his brother, Sir William Cavendish. He received a liberal education, and was endowed by his father with considerable landed property in Suffolk. His character and learning seem to have recommended him to the special notice of Cardinal Wolsey, who “took him to be about his own person, as gentleman usher of his chamber, and placed a special confidence in him.” George Cavendish was succeeded by his son William, and ultimately the manor of Cavendish-Overhall passed to William Downes. Sir Thomas Cavendish was one of the knights of St. John of Jerusalem, and died unmarried. Sir William Cavendish, the second son of the first Sir Thomas, became the founder of the ducal House of Devonshire and of several other noble families. He was married three times: first, to a daughter of Edward Bostock, of Whatcross, in Cheshire; secondly, to a daughter of Sir Thomas Conyngsby, and widow of William Paris; and, thirdly, to Elizabeth, daughter of John Hardwick, of Hardwick, and widow of Robert Barley, of Barley, all in the county of Derby. He was “a man of learning and business,” and was much employed in important affairs by his sovereigns, filling the posts of Treasurer of the Chamber and Privy Councillor to Henry VIII., Edward VI., and Mary. At the suppression of the religious houses
- 44. Arms of Hardwick. under Henry VIII. he was “appointed one of the commissioners for visiting them, and afterwards was made one of the auditors of the Court of Augmentation,” which was instituted for the purpose of augmenting the revenues by the suppression of the monasteries. For his services he received three valuable manors in Hertfordshire, which, later on, he exchanged for lands in Derbyshire and other counties. He was also knighted by Henry VIII. By his first wife he had issue one son and two daughters who died young, and two other daughters, one of whom, Catherine, married Sir Thomas Brooke, son of Lord Cobham, and the other, Anne, married Sir Henry Baynton. By his second wife he had three daughters, who all died young, and she herself died in child-birth. By his third marriage with “Bess of Hardwick” he had a numerous family—viz. Henry Cavendish, of Tutbury, member of Parliament for Derbyshire, who married Grace, daughter of George, Earl of Shrewsbury, but died without lawful issue; Sir William Cavendish, created Earl of Devonshire, and direct ancestor of the Dukes of Devonshire; Sir Charles Cavendish, of Bolsover Castle and of Welbeck Abbey, ancestor of the Dukes of Newcastle, Portland, c. (of whom presently); Frances, married to Sir Henry Pierrepoint, ancestor to the Dukes of Kingston; Elizabeth, married to Charles Stuart, Duke of Lennox (younger brother of Lord Darnley, the husband of Mary, Queen of Scots, and father of King James I.), the issue of which marriage was the sadly unfortunate Lady Arabella Stuart; and Mary, married to Gilbert, Earl of Shrewsbury. Of the Countess of Shrewsbury, “Bess of Hardwick,” mother of the founder of this house, it will now be well to say a few words. The family to which she belonged, and of which she eventually became heiress, that of Hardwick, of Hardwick was one of considerable antiquity in the county of Derby. One of the family, William Hardwick, married the heiress of Goushill, of Barlborough, and by her had two sons, the eldest of whom, Roger Hardwick,
- 45. married the daughter of Robert Barley, of Barley, and had issue by her, John, who married Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Bakewell, of Bakewell. Their son, John Hardwick, married Elizabeth Pinchbeck, of Pinchbeck, and was succeeded by his son, John Hardwick, who espoused Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Leake, of Hasland, of the same family as the Leakes, Earls of Scarsdale. By this marriage John Hardwick, who died in 1527, had issue one son—John Hardwick— and four daughters—Mary, Elizabeth, Alice, and Jane. The son, John, who was only three years old at his father’s death, married Elizabeth, daughter of Philip Draycott, of Paynsley, but died without issue, leaving his four sisters his co-heiresses. Of these Elizabeth, afterwards Countess of Shrewsbury, inherited Hardwick and other estates. When very young—indeed, it is said when scarcely fourteen years of age—she married Robert Barley, of Barley (son of Arthur Barley, of Barley-by-Dronfield, in Derbyshire, by his wife, Elizabeth Chaworth), who died a few months after marriage, leaving his possessions to her and her heirs. By this short-lived marriage she had no issue, and, after remaining a widow for some twelve years or so, she married, as his third wife, Sir William Cavendish, by whom she had a numerous issue, as will be presently shown. To Sir William Cavendish this remarkable lady brought not only Hardwick and the other possessions of her own family, but also those of the Barleys, which she had acquired by her first marriage. Sir William died in 1557, and a few years later his widow married, as her third husband, Sir William St. Loe, or Santloe, Captain of the Guard to Queen Elizabeth, who settled the whole of his estates upon her and her heirs, and thus greatly added to her already immense possessions. By this marriage there was no issue, and, on the death of Sir William St. Loe, she was a third time left a widow. Soon afterwards she married, as his second wife (he being, of course, her fourth husband), George, sixth Earl of Shrewsbury, stipulating, however, that the Earl’s eldest daughter, the Lady Grace Talbot, should marry her eldest son, Sir Henry Cavendish, and that his second son, Gilbert Talbot (eventually Earl of Shrewsbury), should marry her youngest daughter, Mary Cavendish. These family nuptials were solemnised at Sheffield on the 9th of February, 1567-8, the younger of the two
- 46. couples being at the time only about fifteen and twelve years of age respectively. Autograph of the Countess of Shrewsbury. The events of the Countess of Shrewsbury’s life are so thoroughly mixed up with those of the stirring times of the kingdom at large, more especially during the period when the truly unfortunate Mary, Queen of Scots, was in the custody of the Earl and his countess, that it is unnecessary here to enter into them. By the Earl of Shrewsbury the Countess had no issue, and he dying in 1590, she, “Bess of Hardwick,” became, for the fourth time, a widow. “A change of conditions,” says Bishop Kennet, “that perhaps never fell to the lot of one woman, to be four times a creditable and happy wife; to rise by every husband into greater wealth and higher honours; to have a numerous issue by one husband only; to have all those children live, and all by her advice be creditably disposed of in her lifetime; and, after all, to live seventeen years a widow in absolute power and plenty.” The Countess, as we have before written, “besides being one of the most beautiful, accomplished, and captivating women of her day, was, without exception, the most energetic, business-like, and able of her sex. In architecture her conceptions were grand, while in all matters pertaining to the arts, and to the comforts and elegancies of life, she was unsurpassed. To the old hall of her fathers, where she was born and resided, she made vast additions, and she entirely planned and built three of the most gorgeous edifices of the time—Hardwick Hall, Chatsworth, and Oldcotes—the first two of which were transmitted entire to the first
- 47. Duke of Devonshire. The latter part of her long and busy life she occupied almost entirely in building, and it is marvellous what an amount of real work—hard figures and dry details—she got through; for it is a fact, abundantly evidenced by the original accounts remaining to this day, that not a penny was expended on her buildings, and not a detail added or taken away, without her special attention and personal supervision. Building was a passion with her, and she indulged it wisely and well, sparing neither time, nor trouble, nor outlay to secure everything being done in the most admirable manner. It is said, and it is so recorded by Walpole, that the Countess had once been told by a gipsy fortune-teller that she would never die so long as she continued building, and she so implicitly believed this that she never ceased planning and contriving and adding to her erections; and it is said that at last she died in a hard frost, which totally prevented the workmen from continuing their labours, and so caused an unavoidable suspension of her works. Surely the fortune-teller here was a “wise woman” in more senses than one, for it was wise and cunning in her to instil such a belief into the Countess’s mind, and thus insure a continuance of the works by which so many workmen and their families gained a livelihood, and by which later generations would also benefit. Besides Chatsworth, Hardwick, Oldcotes, and other places, the Countess founded and built the Devonshire Almshouses at Derby, and did many other good and noble works. She died, full of years and full of honours and riches, on the 23rd of February, 1607, and was buried in All Saints’ Church, Derby, under a stately tomb which she had erected during her lifetime, and on which a long Latin inscription is to be seen.” By her second husband, Sir William Cavendish, she alone had issue. These were, as already detailed, Sir Henry Cavendish, of Tutbury, who married the Lady Grace Talbot; Sir William Cavendish, created Earl of Devonshire, from whom the Dukes of Devonshire and other lines of peers are lineally descended; Sir Charles Cavendish, the founder of the noble House of Newcastle; Frances, married to Sir Henry Pierrepoint, ancestor of the Dukes of Kingston; Elizabeth,
- 48. married to Charles Stuart, Duke of Lennox, and mother of Lady Arabella Stuart; and Mary, married to Gilbert, Earl of Shrewsbury. It is with the third of these, Sir Charles Cavendish, that we have now to do. Sir Charles Cavendish married Elizabeth, daughter and heiress of Cuthbert, Lord Ogle, and Baroness Ogle in her own right. He left issue by his first wife, Margaret Kitson, three sons—Charles, who died an infant; William, created Duke of Newcastle; and Sir Charles, of Bolsover. Dying in 1617, the estates passed to the eldest surviving son, William Cavendish, who became one of the greatest men of the age. Sir William was successively created Baron Cavendish, of Bolsover, in the county of Derby, Baron Ogle, Viscount Mansfield, Earl of Newcastle, Earl of Ogle, Marquis of Newcastle, and Duke of Newcastle, was a Knight of the Garter, and held many very important appointments. He was a staunch Royalist, and suffered many losses and privations through his wise adherence to the royal cause. He fortified the town of Newcastle, the Castle of Bolsover, and other places, and did good service in overcoming the Parliamentarian forces at Gainsborough, Chesterfield, Bradford, and many other places. His grace built the greater part of Welbeck, including the famous riding-house, yet standing, and the stables. He was the most accomplished horseman of the time, and his name will ever remain known as the author of the finest, most learned, and most extensive work on horsemanship ever written. The original MS. of this marvellous treatise is carefully preserved at Welbeck Abbey, and copies of the work, especially the first French edition, with all the original plates, are of great rarity. He also wrote some volumes of poetry. The “Horsemanship” is particularly interesting to an historian of Welbeck, from the many plates in which views of the mansion as it then existed are given: to these we may again refer. The Duke was married twice. First, to Elizabeth, daughter and sole heiress of William Bassett, of Blore and Langley, Derbyshire, and widow of the Hon. Henry Howard, third son of the Earl of Suffolk and Berkshire; and, secondly, to Margaret, daughter of Sir Charles
- 49. Lucas, and maid of honour to Queen Henrietta. By his first wife the Duke had issue ten children, six sons and four daughters, of whom five died young. Margaret (Lucas), Duchess of Newcastle. The surviving sons were Charles, who died during his father’s lifetime without issue, and Henry, who succeeded to the titles and estates; and the three surviving daughters were—Mary, married to Charles Cheney, of Chesham-Boys; Elizabeth, married to the Earl of Bridgewater; and Frances, married to Lord Bolingbroke. By his second wife, Margaret Lucas, the Duke had no issue; but to this lady, who was of rare accomplishments and virtues—“a very learned
- 50. lady and a philosopher”—the world is indebted for many valuable writings. Foremost among these is the admirable and interesting “Life” of her husband, the Duke of Newcastle, to which too much justice for its truthfulness, its precision of details, and its purity of affection cannot be done. It is a “book for all time,” and to it we refer our readers who may desire to peruse a worthy memoir of a worthy man. The Duchess died in 1673, and the Duke three years afterwards: they are buried under a magnificent monument in Westminster Abbey, where the following is one of the inscriptions: —“Here lyes the Loyall Duke of Newcastle and his Dutchess his second wife, by whom he had no issue: Her name was Margarett Lucas, youngest sister to the Lord Lucas, of Colchester; a noble familie, for all the brothers were valiant, and all the sisters virtuous. This Dutchess was a wise, wittie, and learned lady, which her many books do well testifie; she was a most virtuous and a loveing and carefull wife, and was with her Lord all the time of his banishment and miseries, and when he came home never parted from him in his solitary retirements.” Henry, second Duke, Marquis, and Earl of Newcastle, Earl and Baron of Ogle, Viscount Mansfield, Baron Cavendish of Bolsover, and Baron Bothal and Hepple, and a Knight of the Garter, succeeded his father, the first duke. He married Frances Pierrepoint, of Thoresby, granddaughter of the Earl of Kingston, by whom he had issue three sons (only one of whom lived) and five daughters. The son, Henry Cavendish, Viscount Mansfield, married a daughter of Percy, Duke of Northumberland, whose name he assumed, but died during his father’s lifetime without surviving issue. The daughters were— Elizabeth, married, first, to the Earl of Albemarle, and, secondly, to the Duke of Montague; Frances, married to the Earl of Bredalbane; Catherine, married to the Earl of Thanet; Arabella, married to the Earl of Sunderland; and Margaret, married to John Holles, Earl of Clare, afterwards Duke of Newcastle. The second duke died in 1671, and the titles, in default of male issue, then became extinct. By the marriage of the Lady Margaret Cavendish with John Holles, fourth Earl of Clare, Welbeck and other estates of the Duke
- 51. Arms of Holles. Arms of Bentinck. of Newcastle passed into his hands. In 1694 the Earl of Clare was created Duke of Newcastle. His grace died at Welbeck, through a fall from his horse, in 1711, and the title thus again became extinct. He left issue an only daughter, the Lady Henrietta Cavendish Holles, who married Edward Harley, second Earl of Oxford and Mortimer, and thus conveyed the Welbeck and Bolsover estates to that nobleman. The issue of this marriage was an only daughter and heiress, the Lady Margaret Cavendish Harley, who married William Bentinck, Duke of Portland. and thus carried the Cavendish estates into that illustrious family. She died in 1785. William Bentinck, the first Earl of Portland, was a member of the illustrious family of Bentinck, of Holland, and came over on his first visit to England as page of honour to William, Prince of Orange (afterwards King William III.), and was ambassador to this country to arrange the marriage of that prince with our Princess Mary. On the accession of William III. William Bentinck was created Baron of Cirencester, Viscount Woodstock, and Earl of Portland, and had many important appointments conferred upon him. He married, first, Anne, daughter to Sir Edward Villiers and sister of the Earl of Jersey, by whom he had issue three sons (one of whom only survived and succeeded him) and five daughters—viz. the Lady Mary, married to the Earl of Essex, and afterwards to the Hon. Conyers D’Arcy; the Lady Anne Margaretta, married to M. Duyvenvorde, one of the principal nobles of Holland; the Lady Frances Wilhelmina, married to Lord Byron; the Lady Eleanora, who died unmarried; and the Lady Isabella, married to the Duke of Kingston. His lordship married, secondly, Jane, daughter of Sir John Temple, sister of Lord Palmerston, and widow
- 52. of John, Lord Berkeley of Stratton, and by her had issue two sons and four daughters—viz. the Hon. William, who married the Countess of Aldenburgh; the Hon. Charles John, who married the daughter and heiress of the Earl of Cadogan; the Lady Sophia, married to Henry de Grey, Duke of Kent; the Lady Elizabeth, married to the Bishop of Hereford, brother to the second Duke of Bridgewater; the Lady Harriette, married to Viscount Limerick; and the Lady Barbara, married to Godolphin, Dean of St. Paul’s. The Earl died in 1735, and was succeeded by his son— Henry, second Earl of Portland, who married the Lady Elizabeth Noel, eldest daughter of the Earl of Gainsborough, by whom he received, with other accessions, the lordship of Tichfield and its manor-house. His lordship, who was advanced to the dignities of Marquis of Tichfield and Duke of Portland, and held many important appointments, had issue three sons and seven daughters, whereof two sons and three daughters survived him. These were—William second Duke of Portland; Lord George Bentinck, aide-de-camp to King George II.; the Lady Anne, married to Lieutenant-colonel Paul; the Lady Anne Isabella, married to Henry Monk, Esq.; and the Lady Emilia Catherine, married to Jacob Arrant Van Wassenar, a noble of Holland. William, second Duke of Portland, was born in 1709, and married, in 1734, the Lady Margaret Cavendish Harley, daughter and sole heiress of the Earl of Oxford by his countess, daughter and sole heiress of John Holles, Duke of Newcastle, who thus brought the estates of Welbeck, c., to the Bentinck family. By this union his grace had issue three sons and three daughters. These were—the Lady Elizabeth Cavendish Bentinck, married to the Marquis of Thomond; Lady Henrietta Cavendish Bentinck, married to the Earl of Stamford; William Henry Cavendish Bentinck, Marquis of Tichfield (his successor), of whom presently; Lady Margaret Cavendish Bentinck and Lady Frances Cavendish Bentinck, who died young; and Lord Edward Charles Cavendish Bentinck, who married Elizabeth Cumberland, and had numerous issue. The Duke died in 1762, and was succeeded in his titles and estates by his eldest son—
- 53. William Henry Cavendish Bentinck, as third Duke of Portland. This nobleman, who was born in 1738, married, in 1766, the Lady Dorothy Cavendish, only daughter of William, fourth Duke of Devonshire, and by her had issue four sons and two daughters. These were—William Henry, Marquis of Tichfield (his successor); General Lord William Henry Cavendish Bentinck, Governor-General of India, who married a daughter of the Earl of Gosford; Lady Charlotte Bentinck, married to Charles Greville, Esq.; Lady Mary Bentinck; Lord William Charles Augustus Cavendish Bentinck, who married, first, Miss G. A. F. Seymour, and, secondly, Anne, daughter of the Marquis Wellesley, and divorced wife of Sir William Addy; and Major-General Lord Frederick Cavendish Bentinck, who married the Lady Mary Lowther, daughter of William, first Earl of Lonsdale of the second creation, and by her, with other issue, became father of the present Right Hon. George Augustus Frederick Cavendish Bentinck, M.P. for Whitehaven, and a member of the Administration. The noble Duke died in 1809, and was succeeded by his eldest son— William Henry, fourth Duke of Portland, who was born in 1768, married in 1795 Henrietta, eldest daughter and co-heiress of General John Scott, of Balconnie, county Fife, by whom he received a large accession of property. His grace, by royal sign manual, assumed the additional surname and arms of Scott, thus altering the family name to Scott-Bentinck. By this marriage his grace had issue four sons and four daughters. These were—William Henry Cavendish Scott- Bentinck, Marquis of Tichfield, who died unmarried during his father’s lifetime; the Lady Henrietta; William John, Marquis of Tichfield, who succeeded to the dukedom and estates; Major Lord William George Frederick Cavendish Scott-Bentinck (known as Lord George Bentinck), the eminent statesman and patriot, who died in 1848, to whom a fine Gothic memorial, somewhat after the manner of the “Martyrs’ Memorial,” has been erected by public subscription at Mansfield, from the design of Mr. T. C. Hine. It bears the following inscription:— “To the memory of Lord George Frederick Cavendish Bentinck, second surviving son of William Henry Cavendish-Scott, fourth Duke of Portland.
- 54. He died the 21st day of September, An. Dom. mdcccxlviii., in the forty- seventh year of his age. His ardent patriotism and uncompromising honesty were only equalled by the persevering zeal and extraordinary talents which called forth the grateful homage of those who, in erecting this memorial, pay a heartfelt tribute to exertions which prematurely brought to the grave one who might long have lived the pride of this his native county.” Lord Henry William Cavendish Scott-Bentinck; the Lady Charlotte, married to John Evelyn Denison, M.P.; the Lady Lucy, married to Lord Howard de Walden; and the Lady Mary. His grace, who was a fellow of the Royal Society, a trustee of the British Museum, and a man of high scientific attainments, died in 1854, and was succeeded by his eldest surviving son, the present noble head of this illustrious house. William John Cavendish Scott-Bentinck, the present peer, fifth Duke of Portland, Marquis of Tichfield, Earl of Portland, Viscount Woodstock, Baron of Cirencester, and a co-heir to the barony of Ogle, was born on the 17th of September, 1800, and represented the borough of Lynn in Parliament. In 1854 he succeeded his father in the titles and estates. The Duke, who is unmarried, is a trustee of the British Museum, and a deputy-lieutenant of the county of Nottingham. His grace, who is a man of the most refined taste in all matters of Art, an accomplished scholar, and of high attainments, is patron of thirteen livings—viz. Hendon, in Middlesex; Hucknall- Torkard, Sutton-cum-Lound, Cotham, Kirkby-in-Ashfield, Gotham, and Sibthorpe, in Nottinghamshire; Bredon, in Worcestershire; Elsworth, in Cambridgeshire; Whitwell, Elmton, and Bolsover, in Derbyshire; and Bothal, in Northumberland. The arms of the Duke of Portland are—quarterly, 1st and 4th grand quarters, quarterly 1 and 4, azure, a cross moline, argent (for Bentinck) 2 and 3, sable, three stags’ heads caboshed, argent, a crescent for difference (for Cavendish), 2nd and 3rd grand quarters, or, on a bend, azure, a mullet of six points between two crescents, or, within a bordure engrailed, gules (for Scott). Crests—1st, out of a marquis’s coronet, proper, two arms counter embowed, vested, gules, on the hands gloves, or, each holding an ostrich feather, or
- 55. Arms of the Duke of Portland. (for Bentinck); 2nd, a snake nowed, proper (for Cavendish). Supporters—two lions, double queued, the dexter one or, the sinister one sable. Motto—“Craignez honte.” The Duke of Portland’s seats are —Welbeck Abbey, Nottinghamshire; Fullarton House, Troon, Ayrshire; Langwell, Goldspie, Caithness; Bothal Castle, Northumberland; Harcourt House, Cavendish Square; and Hyde Park Gardens. The heir-presumptive to the titles and estates of the Duke of Portland is his grace’s cousin, Major-general Arthur Cavendish Bentinck, youngest son of the late Lord William Charles Augustus Cavendish Bentinck, brother of the fourth duke. He was born in 1819, and married, first, in 1857, a daughter of Sir Vincent Whitshed, Bart., who died in 1858 (by whom he has a son, William John Arthur Charles James Cavendish Bentinck); and, secondly, in 1862, Augusta Mary Elizabeth, daughter of the Hon. and Very Rev. Henry Montague Browne, Dean of Lismore, by whom he has also issue. The earliest views of the mansion of Welbeck are those which occur on the magnificent folio plates which accompany the Duke (at that time Marquis) of Newcastle’s splendid and matchless work on “Horsemanship”[55] in 1658. The plates are all splendidly engraved from Diepenbeck’s drawings, and are among the most valuable illustrations of the period left to us. One of these plates gives a general view of Welbeck (“La Maison de Welbeck appartenant à Monseigneur le Marquis de Newcastle, le quel est dans la Province de Nottingham”), showing an extensive building four stories in height, and partly enclosed with battlemented and other walls; the end having three gables, with a central doorway, and the side of three distinct lengths. The main building, that with the three gables, is four stories in height, with mullioned and transomed windows, hipped windows in the roof, and ornamental clustered chimney-
- 56. Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world, offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth. That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to self-development guides and children's books. More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and personal growth every day! ebookmasss.com