History Headscratchers / TheUnexpectedHeiress

* Why exactly does the family act like John will be the future viscount in the end? Not only is it never clarified where John stands in the line of succession (adopted children of peers didn't even get courtesy titles at the time, so him inheriting because Lord and Lady Ashbourne adopted him is out), but as far as I can tell, the act providing a peer the possibility to refuse an inherited title wasn't even a passed until 50 years later, meaning that even if John was next in line for the title, it wouldn't fall to him until Francis died. If Francis didn't have any children that could inherit in the interim, that is. (And John could very well be in line to inherit, he is a distant cousin, after all. But that would require his parents to have been married, which we don't know, and everyone else in the family tree more closely related to the Ashbourne-Somersets than him to be ineligible for the inheritance.)

* Why exactly does the family act like John will be the future viscount in the end? Not only is it never clarified where John stands in the line of succession (adopted children of peers didn't even get courtesy titles at the time, so him inheriting because Lord and Lady Ashbourne adopted him is out), but as far as I can tell, the act providing a peer the possibility to refuse an inherited title wasn't even a passed until 50 years later, meaning that even if John was next in line for the title, it wouldn't fall to him until Francis died. If Francis didn't have any children that could inherit in the interim, that is. (And John could very well be in line to inherit, he is a distant cousin, after all. But that would require his parents to have been married, which we don't know, and everyone else in the family tree more closely related to the Ashbourne-Somersets than him to be ineligable for the inheritance.)
** And yes, I do know that this is an unecessarily pedantic point to make about an app game, please don't take it too seriously.

* Why exactly does the family act like John will be the future viscount in the end? Not only is it never clarified where John stands in the line of succession (adopted children of peers didn't even get courtesy titles at the time), but as far as I can tell, the act providing a peer the possibility to refuse an inherited title wasn't even a passed until 50 years later, meaning that even if John was next in line for the title, it wouldn't fall to him until Francis died. If Francis didn't have any children that could inherit in the interim, that is. (And John could very well be in line to inherit, he is a distant cousin, after all. But that would require his parents to have been married, which we don't know, and everyone else in the family tree more closely related to the Ashbourne-Somersets than him to be ineligable for the inheritance.)

* Why exactly does the family act like John will be the future viscount in the end? Not only is it never clarified where John stands in the line of succession (adopted children of peers didn't even get courtesy titles at the time), but as far as I can tell, the act providing a peer the possibility to refuse an inherited title wasn't even a passed until 50 years later, meaning that even if John was next in line for the title, it wouldn't fall to him until Francis died. If Francis didn't have any children that could inherit in the interim, that is. (And John could very well be in line to inherit, he is a distant cousin, after all. But that would require his parents to have been married, which we don't know, and everyone else in the family tree more closely related to the Ashbourne-Somersets than him to be ineligable for the inheritance.)

* Why exactly does the family act like John will be the future viscount in the end? Not only is it never clarified where John stands in the line of succession (adopted children of peers didn't even get courtesy titles at the time), but as far as I can tell, the act providing a peer the possibility to refuse an inherited title wasn't even a passed until 50 years later, meaning that even if John was next in line for the title, it wouldn't fall to him until Francis did. If Francis didn't have any children that could inherit in the interim, that is. (And John could very well be in line to inherit, he is a distant cousin, after all. But that would require his parents to have been married, which we don't know, and everyone else in the family tree more closely related to the Ashbourne-Somersets than him to be ineligable for the inheritance.)

* Why exactly does the family act like John will be the future viscount in the end? Not only is it never clarified where John stands in the line of succession (adopted children of peers didn't even get courtesy titles at the time), but as far as I can tell, the act to refuse an inherited title wasn't even a passed until 50 years later, meaning that even if John was next in line for the title, it wouldn't fall to him until Francis did. If Francis didn't have any children that could inherit in the interim, that is. (And John could very well be in line to inherit, he is a distant cousin, after all. But that would require his parents to have been married, which we don't know, and everyone else in the family tree more closely related to the Ashbourne-Somersets than him to be ineligable for the inheritance.)