to prejudice him touching his Mothers Inheritance who also did not offend or contrariwise especially in case where the Mother was seized of an Estate in Feesimple either in Lands or Tenements or Title of Honour And this was the case if I be not mistaken of Philip late Earl of Arundel notwithstanding the Attainder of Thomas Duke of Norfolk his Father for he had that Earldom in right of his Mother But they do agree That if the Lands or Tenements or a Title of Honour be given to a man and to his wife in tayl who hath Issue The Father is attainted of Treason and executed though this forfeiture of the Husband shall be no barr to the Wife concerning her interest by Survivorship yet their Issue is barred by the Statute 26 Hen. 8. cap. 13. and his Blood corrupted For in that case the Heir must necessarily make himself Heir as well of the Body of the one as of the other And yet the words of the Statute 32 Hen. 8. cap. 28. are That no Fine Feofâ—ment or other Act or Acts hereafter to be made or suffered by the Husband only of any Mannors Lands Tenements or Hereditaments being the Inheritance or Freehold of his Wife during the Coverture between them shall in any wise be or make any discontinuance or be prejudicial to the said Wife or to her Heirs or to such as shall have right title or interest to the same by the death of such Wife or Wives but the same Wife or her Heirs and such other to whom such right shall appertain after her decease shall or may then lawfully enter into all such Mannors Lands Tenements and Hereditaments according to their Rights and Titles therein For there is Adversity taken and agreed for Law between a discontinuance which doth imply a wrong and a lawful Baron which doth imply a right And therefore if Land be given to the Husband and the Wife and to the Heirs of their Bodies begotten and the Husband levies a Fine with Proclamation or do commit High Treason and dieth and the Wife before or after Entry dieth the Issue is barred and the Comisee for the King hath right unto the Lands because the Issue cannot claim as Heir unto both And with this doth agree Dyer 351. b. adjudged vide 5 Hen. 7. 32. Cott's Assize Coke's eighth part 27. where it is resolved That the Statute 32 Hen. 8. doth extend only unto Discontinuances although the Act hath general words or be prejudicial to the Wife or her Heirs c. but the conclusion if she shall lawfully enter c. according to their right and title therein which they cannot do when they be barred and have no right title and interest And this Statute doth give advantage unto the Wife c. so long as she hath right but it doth not extend to take away a future barr Although the Statute doth give Entry without limitation of any time nevertheless the Entry must attend upon the right and therefore if the Wife be seized in Feesimple and her Husband levy a Fine with Proclamation unto another and dieth now the Wife may enter by force of the Statute for as yet that Fine is not any barr unto her but her right doth remain which she may continue by Entry but if she do surcease her time and the five years do pass without Entry c. now by force of the Fine with Proclamation and five years past after the death of her Husband she is barred of her right and by consequence she cannot enter And the Statute doth speak of Fine only and not of Fine with Proclamation If there be Father and Son and the Father be seized of Lands holden in Capite or otherwise by Knight's Service the King doth create the Son Duke Earl or other Degree of Nobility and afterwards the Father dieth his Son being within the Age of One and twenty years he shall be no Ward but if the King had made him Knight in the life of his Father he should not have been in Ward after the death of his Father neither for the Lands descended nor for his Marriage though he be within Age. NOBILITY AND LORDS IN REPUTATION ONLY CHAP. XIV THERE are also other Lords in Reputation and Appellation who nevertheless are not de jure neither can they enjoy the priviledges of those of the Nobility that are Lords of the Parliament The Son and Heir of a Duke during his Father's life is only in courtesie of Speech and Honour called an Earl and the eldest Son of a Marquiss or an Earl a Lord but not so in legal proceedings or in the King's Courts of Judicature But the King may at his pleasure create them in the life of their Ancestors into any Degree of Lords of the Parliament And according to the German Custom all the younger Sons of Dukes and Marquisses are called Lords but by courtesie only which Title descends not to their Heirs A Duke or other of the Nobility of a Foreign Nation doth come into this Land by the King 's safe Conduct in which said Letters of safe Conduct he is named a Duke according to his Creation yet that Appellation maketh him not a Duke c. to sue or be sued by that name within this Realm but is only so by Reputation But if the King of Denmark or other Sovereign King come into England under safe Conduct he during his abode here ought to be styled by the name of King and to retain his Honour although not his Regal Command and Power And in this case may be observed by the way That no Sovereign King may enter into this Realm without licence though he be in League All the younger Sons of the Kings of England are of the Nobility of England and Earls by their Birth without any other Creation And if an Englishman be created Earl of the Empire or some other Title of Honour by the Emperor or other Monarch he shall not bear that Dignity in England but is only an Earl in Reputation A Lord or Peer of Scotland or Ireland is not of the Nobility or Peerage of England in all Courts of Justice although he is commonly reputed a Lord and hath priviledge as a Peer OF THE QUEEN CONSORT AND OF NOBLE WOMEN CHAP. XV. A QUEEN so called from the Sâ—xon word Cuningine as the King from Cuning by variation of Gender only as was their manner signifieth Power and Knowledge and thereby denotes the Sovereignty due unto them which they enjoyed in those days and do now in most Nations being capable of the Royal Diadem by the common right of Inheritance for want of Heirs Male But in France by the Salique Law the Sex is excluded from their Inheritance by which they debarred the English Title to their Crown There are three kinds of persons capable of the Title and Dignity of Queen amongst us and each of them different in Power and Priviledge The first is a Queen Sovereign to whom the Crown descends by Birth-right
then Countess of Killimeak in Ireland The Lady Dudley Dutchess of 〈…〉 The celebrated Beauties Barbara Villiers Dutchess of Cleaveland and Countess of Southampton and Louyse Rene Angelique de Carwell Dutchess of Portsmouth Countess of Petersfield c. Of Titles by Descent and Marriage there are Examples enough so that I need not trouble the Reader with any repetition I shall only set down some few general Observations not sufficiently discoursed of If a King's Daughter marry a Duke or an Earl illa â—emper dicitur Regalis by Law and Courtesie Noble women by descent Birthright or Creation remain Noble although they marry Husbands under that degree Also any Daughter of an Earl or Viscount that continues a Virgin or marrieth an Esquire yet she retaineth the Honour that sprung from her Parents and shall take place accordingly and be saluted by the Title of Lady If a Gentleman Knight or Peer marry a wife of ignoble Parents she shall enjoy the Title Name and Dignity of her Husband not only during his life but when she is a widow or afterwards married to an Ignoble person but this is by the Courtesie and not by the Law of the Realm Whereas on the contrary let a woman of Blood and Coat-Armour marry a Yeoman or Churle that is Ignoble and hath no Coat-Armour his Condition in point of Honour is in no respect advanced and she shall retain the Honour State and Dignity she was born unto Yet if she have iâ—â—ue by that Yeoman or Ignoble person she being an Heiress that Issue shall have liberty to bear her Coat but Sir Iohn Fern saith only for life and that on a Lozenge Shield with a difference of a Cinquefoil If a French Spanish or other woman Alien be married to a Peer of the Realm or to a Gentleman and be not denizened she is debarred all Priviledges and Titles due to her Husband nor can she claim any Dower or Joynture from him by the Laws of England Yet in some things our Laws are wonderful kind to the Female Sex especially procreandi causa As thus if a man and his wife separate for some fraud or private loathing of the Marriage Bed or the like and so continue for some years after which time the woman bringeth forth a Child which though got by another man and her Husband in all that time not having enjoyed her yet if he live in the Kingdom he must Father the Child and if before that time he had no Child that shall inherit his Lands if entailed or left without Will Also if a Wife be with Child when her Husband dieth and she marry another man before her delivery the latter Husband must own the Child which must be his Heir at Law if he were childless The Wives Dignities and Lands descend to her Heirs not to her Husband yet to encourage him to play the man the Courtesie of England is such that as the Wife hath the third part of his Estate in Lands for her Joynture during her life if a Widow so the Husband if he get his Wife with Child and that Child be heard to cry he shall enjoy all her Lands during his life The Wife can make no contract whatsoever that shall stand good in Law to the detriment of her Husband without his consent nor can she make a Will or dispose of what she hath whilst she is a Feme Covert â—he cannot be produced as a witness for or against her Husband nor shall she be accessory to his felonious acts although she receive the Goods or conceive the Fact if she be not personally an Actor therein Female Children are also by Law capable to give their consent to marriage at Seven years old and the Lord 's eldest Daughter is to have aid of his Tenants to marry her at that age though she may dissent from this Contract when she comes to Twelve but if at that Age she doth not dissent she is bound for life she may then make a Will and dispose of Goods and Chattels by it At Nine years of Age she is Dowable at Fourteen she might receive her Lands into her Hands and was then out of Wardship if she were Fourteen at the death of her Ancestor otherwise she was in Wardship till she accomplished Sixteen years and then she was free At One and twenty she is enabled to contract or alienate her Lands by Will or otherwise If there be no Son the Lands as well as Goods are equally divided amongst the Daughters who are Coheirs In ancient times Women amongst the Romans were thought worthy of enjoying peculiar favours and respect And out of their great love and honour to the Mother of Marcus Coriolanus for diverting his fury which he threatned the Citizens to their ruin for their ingratitude towards him the Citizens granted the Roman Dames the priviledge of wearing the Segmenta Aurea or Bordures of Gold and purple on their Garments They were also permitted to wear gold Ear-rings to have place on the way and in memorial of the said preservation there was erected a Temple dedicated to the Female Fortune Anne of Britain wife to Charles the Eighth of France as an ornamental Honour to several deserving Ladies instead of the Military Belt and Collar bestowed on them a Cordon or Lace and admonishing them to live chastly and devoutly and to put the greater esteem thereon the surrounded her Escocheon of Arms with the like Cordon from which Example it is now become the Custome for unmarried women to bear their Arms in form of a Lozenge which are commonly adorned with such a Cordon Ioseph Micheli Marquez for the further Honour of the Female Sex gives an Example of the Noble women of Tortosa in Aragon whom he calls Cavalleros or Knights For saith he Don Raymond last Earl of Barcellona who by right of his wife Petronilla sole Daughter and Heir to King Ramiro the Monk joyned his Principality to the Kingdom of Aragon having in the year 1149. taken from the Moors the City of Tortosa who in a few months after laid siege to the said City and reduced the Inhabitants to so great a strait that their intentions were of surrendring it up to the Moors but the women hearing thereof for the diverting their ruin put on mens Apparel and by a resolute Sally forced the Moors to raise the Seige And the Earl in acknowledgment of his thanks for this their Noble Act as a reward of Honour instituted an Order not much unlike a Military Order into which were admitted only those brave women and their Descendants The Badge which he assigned them was something like a Fryer's Capouch but of a crimson colour which they wore upon their Head-clothes Amongst the priviledges which this Earl granted them they were to be freed from all Taxes to have precedency of men in publick Meetings and that all the Iewels and Apparel of their deceased Husbands should be their own although of never so great value And these women having thus purchased this
to the party for so it is termed in Brook's Title Additions 44. but an Honour to the Kingdom And therefore it hath been an ancient Prerogative of the Kings of this Realm at their pleasure to compel men of worth to take upon them that Degree upon payment of a Fine But we see by Experience in these days that none are compelled thereunto and that is the reason wherefore if the Plaintiff be Knighted having the Writ it shall abate because he hath changed his name and that by his own Act. And for that cause also by the Common Law not only the King but every Lord of a Mannor ought to have of every of his Tenants a reasonable Aid to make his eldest Son a Knight And all Lands are subject to these Aids except only ancient Demesne and grand and petty Serjeanty-Tenures as the Law hath â—een anciently delivered And in Io. Shelden 131. where also it is said one that wrote a little after the Statute of Westminster the first allows as a good barr to the Avowry for the Tenant to plead that the Father himself is no Knight so that one not Knighted cannot claim this Ayd of his Tenants Briâ—an cap. de prices de avers And it was at the liberty of the Lord to make more or less of his Tenants by the Common Law in this Case but by the Statute of Westminster the first Chap. 35. it is put in contrary viz. forasmuch as before this time reasonable Aid to make ones Son Knight or to marry his Daughter was never put in certain nor how much should be taken nor at what time whereby some levied unreasonable Aid and more often than seemed necessary whereby the people were sore grieved It is provided that from henceforth of a whole Knight's Fee there be taken but Twenty shillings and of Twenty pounds in Land holden in Soccage Twenty shillings and of more more and of less less after that rate And that none shall levy such Aid to make his Son a Knight until his Son be of fifteen years old nor to marry his Daughter until she be of the Age of seven years And of that there shall be mention made in the King's Writs formed on the same when any will demand it And if it happen that the Father after he hath levied such Aid of his Tenants die before he hath married his Daughter the Executors of the Father shall be bound to the Daughter for so much as the Father received for the Aid And if the Father's Goods be not sufficient his Heir shall be charged therewith unto the Daugher And this Aid is so incident that although the Lord do confirm unto the Tenant to hold by Fealty and certain Rent and release unto him all other Services and Demands yet shall he have the Aid to make his eldest Son a Knight But the King was not bound by the Statute aforementioned because the King was not named in the Statute Therefore by the Statute 25 Edw. 3. chap. 11. the King's Aid were brought to a like value The intention of the Law is That an Heir until the Age of One and twenty years is not able to do Knights Service But such a presumption of Law doth give place to a Judgment of proof to the contrary as Bracton saith Sâ—abitur presumptioni donec probetur in contrarium And therefore when the King who is the Sovereign Judge of all Chivalry hath dubbed him a Knight he by this hath adjudged him able to do him Knight's Service and all men are concluded to say the contrary to it And therefore such an Heir being made a Knight either in the life time of his Father or afterwards during his minority shall be out of Ward and Custody both for his Land and Body and marriage by the Award of the ancient Common Law By reason also that the Honour of Knighthood is so great that it is not to be holden under by any yet if the King do create such an Heir within Age a Duke Marquess Earl Viscount or â—aron by this he shall not be out of Ward and Custody both for his Land and Body And therefore it is propounded by the Statute of Magna Charta chap. 3. Ita tamen quod si ipse dum infra aetatem fuerit fiat miles nihilominus terra remaneat in Custodia Dominorum suorum So that although such an Heir within Age be made Knight and thereby to this purpose is esteemed as of full Age yet the Land shall remain in Custody of the Lord till his Age of One and twenty years by the purview of the said Act. Question If the Son and Heir of the Tenant of the King by Knights Service c. be made Knight in Paris by the French King whether he shall be out of Wardship after the death of his Father or no for thereby he is a Knight in England Coke's seventh part b. 2 Edw. 4. fol. tamen vide in Coke's sixth part 74. b. mention is only made of Knights made by the King himself or by his Lieutenant in Ireland But when the King doth make an Heir apparent within Age of a Tenant by Knights Service a Knight in the life of his Ancestor and after the death of his Ancestor the said Heir being within Age shall in this Case be out of Ward and shall pay no value for his marriage neither shall the Lord have the Custody of the Land for in that Case by the making of him Knight in the life of his Ancestor he is made of full Age so that when his Ancestor dieth no interest either in the Body or in the Land shall invest in the Lord but the Knight may tender his Livery as if he were of full Age And in that case the King shall have primier Seisin as if he had been One and twenty years of Age at the time of the death of his Ancestor and not otherwise For the Statute of Magna Charta doth not extend unto it for the purview of it doth extend only when the Heir in Ward infra aetatem is made Knight then remanet terra in Custodia c. But when the Heir is made Knight in the life of his Ancestor then the Custody cannot remain which never had any inception or essence Also when the Heir after the death of his Ancestor within Age is made Knight if after tender made to him he within Age do marry elsewhere yet he shall not pay the forfeiture of his marriage for by the making him Knight he is out of Ward and Custody of his Lord for then he ought to be sui Iuris and may imploy himself in feats of Arms for defence of the Realm c. and therefore may not be within the Custody of another and none shall pay any forfeiture but when after any refusal he doth marry himself during the time when he is under the custody and keeping of his Lord And this doth appear by the Statute of Merton chap. 6. Si se mariturierit sine licentia
disinherited imprisoned and murthered by their cruel Uncle the Duke of Glocester who being both a Tyrant and Usurper was justly encountred by King Henry the Seventh in the Field So infallible is the Law of Justice in revenging Cruelties and Injuries not always observing the present time wherein they are done but often calling them into reckoning when the Offenders retain least memory of them But as the saying is Ex malis moribus bonae leges oriuntur so their Tragical and Miserable Combustions have occasioned that the Law hath established more certain Resolutions in all these cases and pretences against the right Heir to the Crown than before For first though a common Opinion was conceived that a Conqueror might freely dispose of the Succession of that Estate which he had obtained by the purchase of his Sword which was the Title pretended for William Rufus yet now in our Books this difference is taken for Law viz. between the Conquest of a Kingdom from a Christian King and the Conquest of a Kingdom from an Infidel For if a King come to a Christian Kingdom by Conquest seeing he hath Vitae necis potestatem he may at his pleasure alter and change the Laws of that Kingdom but until he doth make an alteration thereof the ancient Laws do stand and therefore the case of Rufus the ancient Law of this Realm being That the eldest Son should inherit and that a King in possession cannot devise the same by his last Will or by other Act therefore the said William Rufus was no other than a Usurper But if a Christian King should Conquer a Kingdom from an Infidel and being then under his subjection there ipso facto the Laws of the Infidels are abrogated for that they be not only against Christianity but against the Law of God and Nature mentioned in the Decalogue and in that case until certain Laws be established amongst them the King by himself and such Judges as he shall appoint shall judge them and their causes according to natural Equity in such sort as Kings in ancient times did within their Kingdoms before any certain municipal Laws were given And if a King have a Kingdom by Title of Descent there seeing by the Laws of that Kingdom he doth inherit the Kingdom he cannot change those Laws of himself without consent of Parliament Also if a King have a Christian Kingdom by Conquest as King Henry the Second had Ireland after that King Iohn had given unto them being under his Obedience and Subjection the Laws of England for the Government of that Country no succeeding King could alter the same without Parliament In Succession of Kings a question hath been Whether the King who hath had Sons both before and after he came to the Crown which of them should succeed he that was born before as having the prerogative of his Birthright or he that was born after And for each Reasons and Examples have not been wanting For Xerxes the Son of Darius King of Persia being the eldest Son after the enthroning his Father carried away the Empire from his Brother Arthemones or Artobazanes who was born before his Father came to the Royal Possession thereof So Arceses the Son of another Darius born in the time of his Fathers Empire carried away the Garland from his Brother Cyrus born before his Father came to the Empire So Lewis Duke of Millain born after his Father was Duke was preferred to the Dukedom before his Brother Galiasius born before the Dukedom But notwithstanding these Examples and the Opinion of sundry Doctors to the contrary common use of Succession in these latter days hath been to the contrary and that not without good reason for that it is not meet that any that hath right to any Succession by the prerogative of their Birthright such as all elder Brothers have should be put by the same And this was the pretence of Henry the First against Robert his eldest Brother Also sundry Contentions have risen in Kingdoms between the Issue of the eldest Son of the King dying before his Father and the second Brother surviving who should Reign after the death of the Father the Nephew challenging the same unto him by the Title of his Fathers Birthright and by way of Representation Cok. part 3. cap. 4. the other claiming as eldest Son to his Father at the time of his death Upon which Title in old time there grew a Controversie between Arcus the Son of Arrotatus eldest Son of Cleomenes King of Lacedemonia and Cleomenes second Son of Cleomenes Uncle to the said Arcus But upon debate of the matter the Senate gave their Sentence for Arcus against Cleomenes Besides Enominus King of Lacedemon having two Sons Polydectes and Licurgius Poyldectes dying without Children Licurgius succeeded in the Kingdom but after he had understood that Polydectes Widow had a Child he yielded the Crown to him wherein he dealt far more religiously than either did King Iohn or King Richard the Third For King Iohn upon the like pretence not only put by Arthur Plantaginet his eldest Brother's Son from the Succession of the Kingdom but also most unnaturally took away his life And King Richard the Third to come to the Crown did most barbarously not only slay his two innocent Nephews but also defamed his Mother in publishing to the World that the late King his Brother was a Bastard Our Stories do obscurely note that Controversie of like matter had like to have grown between King Richard the Second and Iohn of Gaunt his Uncle and that he had procured the Counsel fo sundry great Learned Men to this purpose but that he found the hearts of divers Noblemen of this Kingdom and especially the Citizens of London to be against him whereupon he desisted from his intended purpose and acknowledged his Nephews Right And the reason of the Common Law of England is notable in this point and may be collected out of the ancient Authors of the same Glanvile lib. 7. cap. 1. Bracton lib. 7. c. 30. and by Brittan fol. 119. For they say Whosoever is Heir to another aut est haeres jure proprietatis as the eldest Son shall inherit only before his Brothers aut jure representationis as where the eldest Son dieth in the life of his Father his Issue shall inherit before the youngest Son for though the youngest sit magis propinquus yet jure representationis the Issue of the eldest Son shall inherit for that he doth represent the person of his Father And as Bracton saith jus proprietatis which his Father had by his Birthright doth descend unto him aut jure propinquitatis ut propinqui jus excludit remotum remotus remotiorem aut jure sanguinis And yet Glanvile Lord Chief Justice under King Henry the Second seemeth to make this questionable here in England Who should be preferred the Uncle or the Nephew Also it hath been resolved for Law That the possession of the Crown purgeth all defects
Adversaries in this manner viz. The Writ of Summons to the Parliament whereby the Baron by Writ hath his Original is to call that Honourable and Worthy Person so summoned to the number of that Right High and Honourable Assembly and to be a Judge to sit hear and determine Life and Member Plea and right of Land if there shall come occasion likewise to give Counsel and Advise in the most mighty Affairs of the Realm But these things are convenient for the quality and condition of men unfitting and altogether unbeseeming the Sex of women Ergo having respect unto the scope and final purpose of such Writs such Inheritances should only descend unto the Heir Female The Second Argument contra Secondly If it shall be answered That although the Heir Female to whom such Inheritance is descended be unfit in her own person for the accomplishing of these things yet she may marry with one sufficiently able for her and in her behalf to execute the same This Answer will neither satisfie nor salve the inconveniences For admit that such an Heir Female were at full Age at the death of her Ancestor unmarried for it doth lye in her own choice then whom shall be her Husband The Third Argument contra Thirdly If such Husband shall be called by the right of his Wife the Writ shall make some mention thereof for otherwise it may well be taken that the Husband was chosen in his own person and in behalf of himself and not in regard of his wife or such pretended Dignity descended unto him But there was never such a Writ of Summons seen wherein the wife was mentioned And if the husband of such a wife have been called to the Parliament which is always by General Writ not mentioning his wife he is thereby made a Baron of himself by virtue of the said Writ Having thus heard both sides to dispute place it doth now require to interpose Opinion to compound the Controversie This point in queâ—tion is somewhat perplexed by means of difficult Presidents For first it is observed That some Presidents do prove that Baronies by Writ have descended unto Heirs Female whose husbands have been called to Parliament whether in regard of themselves or in respect of their wives right it maketh no matter but since it is that the marriage of such Ladies gave that occasion to be summoned and such husbands and their Poâ—â—erity have and do lawfully bear the same Title of Dignity which the Ancestors of such a wife did before rightfully bear For by this Controversie theâ—e is no purpose to call the right of such Noble Houses into question Howbeit Secondly this is to be observed out of the Presidents and to be acknowledged of every dutiful Subject That the King's Majesty is nevertheless at liberty to call to his High Council of Parliament whom he shall in his Princely Wisdom think fit which by his Majestie 's Noble Progenitors have in former Ages likewise observed And therefore whereas Ralph Lord Cromwell being a Baron by Writ died without Issue having two Sisters and Coheirs Elizabeth the eldest who married Sir Thomas Nevile Knight and Ioan the younger who married Sir Humphrey Butcher Knight who was called to Parliament as Lord Cromwell and not the said Sir Thomas Thirdly It is to be observed That if a Baron by Writ die without Heir Male having his Daughter Sister or other Collateral Heir Male that can challenge the Land of the said Baron deceased by any ancient entail or otherwise the Title of such an Heir Female hath heretofore been allowed as by the honourable Opinions and Relations of the Right Honourable the late Commissioners in the Office of Earl-Marshal signified unto the late Queen upon Petition of the Sister and Heir of Gregory Lord Dacres deceased may appear Moreover in the same Pedigree of the Lord Dacres it was expressed That Thomas sometimes Lord Dacres had issue Thomas his eldest Son Ralph his Second and Humphrey his third Thomas the eldest died in the life of his Father having issue Ioan Daughter and Heir who was married to Sir Richard Fines Knight and after Thomas Lord Dacres his Grandfather and Father to the said Ralph and Humphrey died after whose death Henry the Sixth by his Letters Patents bearing date at Westminster the Seventh of November in the Seventh year of his Reign reciting the said Pedigree and Marriage doth by his said Letters Patents accept declare and repute the said Richard Fines to be Lord Dacres and one of the Barons of the Realm But afterwards in the time of Edward the Fourth the said Humphrey Dacres after the attainder of the said Ralph and himself by an Act of Parliament which was the first of Edward the Fourth And after the death of the said Ralph and the Reversal of the said Act by another Act in the Twelfth of Edward the Fourth the said Humphrey made challenge unto the said Barony and unto divers Lands of the said Thomas his Father whereupon both parties after their Title had been considered of in Parliament submitted themselves to the Arbitrement of King Edward the Fourth and entred into Bond each to other for the performance thereof whereupon the said King in his Award under his Privy Seal bearing date at Westminster the Eighth of April Anno Regni sui decimo tertio did Award that the said Richard Fines in the right of Ioan his wife and the Heirs of his body by the said Ioan begotten should keep have and use the same Seat and Place in every Parliament as the said Thomas Dacres Knight Lord Dacres had used and kept and that the Heirs of the body of the said Thomas Dacres Knight then late Lord Dacres begotten should have and hold to them and to their Heirs the Mannor of Holbeach And further That the said King Edward did Award on the other part that the said Humphrey Dacres Knight and the Heirs Males of the said Thomas late Lord Dacres should be reputed had named and called the Lord Dacres of Gillesland and that he and the Heirs Males of the body of the said Thomas then late Lord Dacres should have use and keep the place in Parliament next adjoyning beneath the said place which the said Richard Fines Knight Lord Dacres then had and occupied And that the Heirs of the body of the said Ioan his wife shall have and enjoy and that the Heirs Males of the said Thomas Dacres late Lord Dacres should have to them and the Heirs Males of their bodies begotten the Mannor of Iothington c. And so note that the name of the ancient Barony namely Gillesland remained unto the Heir Male to whom the Land was entailed Moreover this is specially observed If any Baron by Writ do die having no other Issue than Female and that by some special entail or other assurance there be an Heir Male which doth enjoy all or great part of the Lands Possessions and Inheritances of such Baron deceased the Kings have used to call to the
Domini sui ei conferet maritagium suum c. which words cannot be understood when he is out of Ward and Custody no more than when he is married after the Age of One and twenty years Note hereby that the King may prevent his Grantee or other Lords of the double value by Knighthood Yet in such case presently after the Heir is made a Knight after the death of his Ancestor the Lord may have a Writ de valore maritagii for the single Also by the ancient Common Law of this Realm if a Villain be made a Knight he is immediately infranchised And if a Ribald or a man of base birth and condition had struck a Knight by the ancient Law he should have lost his hand wherewith he offended But in France it was anciently adjudged that when the Lord of a Villain had Knighted his Villain being a Gentleman he became free and had his Honour lawâ—ully but if another Lord had Knighted him nothing had been wrought by it for none could manumit him but his Lord and till Manumission or Knighthood he had civil freedom for his ground but was not capable of it except by the King only It was enacted by Parliament in the sixth year of the Reign of King Iohn in haec verba Rex Vicecom c. Sciatis quod consensum est cum assensu Archiepiscoporum Comitum Baronum omnium fidelium nostrorum Angliae quod novem Milites per totam Angliam invenient decuriam Militum bene paratorum aequis armis ad defensionem Regni nostri There hath ever been and still is great use of the Services of Knights even in Civil Affairs and concerning matters of Justice as in a Writ of Right which is the highest Writ in Law for trial of Titles touching the Inheritance of Lands the Tenant is at his Election to have his Trial by great Assize or else by Battel if by the great Assize the Writ De magna Assiza eligenda shall be thus viz. Rex Vicecomiti salutem c. Summone as per bonos summonitores quatuor legales Milites de Comitatu tuo quod sint coram Iusticiariis nostris ad primam Assizam cum in partes illas venerint ad eligendum super sacramentum suum 12 de militibus de visum de N. qui melius sciant velint dicere veritatem adfaciendam recognitionem magnae assurae inter A. petent B. tenent de uno messuagio cum pertinentiis in N. unde idem B. qui tenens est posuit secum magnam Ass. nostram petit recognitionem fieri utrum eorum habent jus in messuagium praed B. qui tunc sit ibi auditurus illam electionem habeas ibi nomina praed milit ad hoc breve c. And upon the Return of this Writ those four Knights must appear gladiis cuncti Dier 79. fol. 103. If the Tenant make his Election by Battel each parties are to choose their Champions and the Court shall award the Battel and the Champions shall be at Mainprize and sworn to perform the Battel at a certain day in the Term and idem dies shall be given to the parties at which day and place a List shall be made in an even and plain Ground there quadrant that is to say every way sixty foot square and the Place or Court for the Justices of the Common Pleas without and upon the Lists furnished with the same Clothes which belong to their Court at Westminster and a Barr shall be there made for the Serjeants at Law and the Robes of the Justices and Serjeants shall be of Scarlet with their Coifs on as it was the Thirteenth of Eliz. and then was made Proclamation with three O Yes And the Demandant first was solemnly demanded and did not appear whereupon the Manuperors of the Champion were demanded to bring forth the Champion of the Demandant who came into the place apparelled with red Sandals upon his black Armour bare legged from the Knee downwards and bare headed and bare Arms to the Elbows being brought in by a Knight namely Sir Ierom Bowes who carried a red Battoon of an ell long tipped with horn and a Yeoman carrying the Target made of double Leather and they were brought in at the North side of the Lists and went about the sides of the Lists until they came to the midst of the Lists and then came towards the Barr before the Justices with three solemn Congies and there was he made to stand on the South side of the place being the right side of the Court And after that the other Champion was brought in in like manner at the South side of the Lists with like Congies by the hands of Sir Henry Chequie Kt. c. and was placed on the North side of the Barr and two Serjeants being of the Counsel of each part in the midst between them This done the Demandant was solemnly called again and appeared not but made default Bowham Serjeant for the Tenant prayed the Court to record the Nonsuit quod factum fuit And then Dyer Chief Justice reciting the Writ and Content and Issue joyned upon the Battel and the other of the Champions to perform it and the prefiction of this day and place did give final Judgment against the Demandant and that the Tenant should have the Land to him and to his Heirs for ever and the Demandant and his Pledges de prosequendo in misericordia Reginae And afterwards solemn Proclamation was made that the Champions and all others there present which were by estimation above Four thousand persons might depart every man in the peace of God and the Queen sic fecerunt cum magno clamore vivat Regina Also if false Judgment be given in the Country which is the Sheriffs Court then the Writ shall be thus Henricus c. Vicecomiti Lincoln salutem Si A. fecerit c. tum in pleno Comitatu tuo per breve nostrum de recto inter Iohannem L. petentem Will B. tenentem de uno messuagio centum acris terrae cum pertinentiis in C. unde idem I. L. queritur falsum sibi factum fuisse Iudicium in eodem Record illud habeas coram Iusticiariis Iuris apud Westminsterium tali die sub sigillo tuo per quatuor legales Milites ejusdem comitatus illos qui Recordo illi interfuerunt summoneas per bonos summonitores praedictum B. quod tunc sit ibi auditurus Recordum illud habeas ibi sua nomina quatuor militum hoc breve Fitz. Nat. Brev. itidem E. And those four must be Knights indeed Also the Justices upon consideration of the usual words in every Writ of Venire Facias Coram c. Duodecim tum Milites quam alios liberos legales homines c. say that these words tum Milites were not at the first put into the Writ without effect Plowden 117. b. For it seemeth that in diebus