Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	die_v	time_n	year_n	9,015	5	4.8371	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A36231	Judge Dodaridge, his law of nobility and peerage wherein the antiquities, titles, degrees, and distinctions, concerning the peeres and nobility of this nation, are excellently set forth : with the knights, esquires, gentleman, and yeoman, and matters incident to them, according to the lawes and customes of England.; Magazine of honour	Bird, William, 17th cent.; Doddridge, John, Sir, 1555-1628.	1658 (1658)	Wing D1794; ESTC R11125	103,063	198

Patents doe grant and give licence for us and our heires so much as in us lyeth to the said Edmond to dispose and give all his Manours Lands Tenements and Knights fees with their appurtenances and Advowsons of Churches Abbies and Priories and Hospitalls which he holdeth of us in chiefe to whom he pleaseth To have and to hold to him and his heires for us and our heires by the service thereof for ever By which Grant the said Edmond gave all his Lands and Tenements to one William sonne of John Deyncourt and to his heires of his body comming And the said Edmond dyed the last yeere of Edward the second and the said William in the time of Edward the third was summoned among other Barons to the Parliament by vertue of the same gift untill his death which was Anno 3. E. 3. It appeareth by divers offices in the time of King Edward the third that John Handlow in the right of Maud his wife was seized of the Mannour of Holgate Acton Burnell c. for terme of her life remainder to Nicolas Handlow alias Burnell sonne to the said Maud and John by a fine in the Court levied and that John Lovell was next heire of the said Maud and her first-borne sonne by her first husband and afterwards the said Nicolas was summoned among other Lords to the Parliament by reason of the fine aforesaid and not the said John Lovel who was next heire Edward Burnell Baron of Holgate Philip Burnell Baron of Holgate Maud Burnell heire to her brother John Lovell the first husband John Lord Lovell Iohn Lord Lovell John Handlow second husband Nicolas Handlow Baron of Holgate Hugh Handlow alias Burnell Baron of Holgate Thomas de Beauchamp the elder Earle of Warwick by a fine levied 18. E. 3. entailed the Mannour and Castle of Warwicke with divers other possessions to himselfe for terme of his life the remainder whereof to Guy his eldest sonne and to the heires males of his body issuing for want of such heires the remainder to come to Thomas Beauchamp brother to the foresaid Guy and to his heires males of his body issuing c. And afterwards the said Guy died without heires male of his body leaving two daughters and heires living afterward the said Earle dyed and the said Thomas the sonne entred into the Castle and Mannour aforesaid with other the premisses and was Earle of Warwick by reason of the entaile aforesaid notwithstanding that Katharine daughter of Guy and next heire to the said Thomas the elder was living 30. yeers after his death Thomas Beauchampe Earl of Warwick Guy de Beauchampe first son obiit ante patrem 30. E. 3. Katharine lived in 21. R. 2. Elizabeth Tho. de Beauchampe Earle of Warwicke by reason of the entail obiit anno 1. H. 4. Rich. Beauchamp Earl of Warwick obiit 17. H. 6. William Beauchampde Beauchamp L. of Aberganey obiit 12. H. 4. Richard de Beauchamp Earl of Warwicke obiit 9. H 5. Richard Earle of Arundell by a fine 21. E. 3. entailed the Castle Towne and Mannor of Arundell with other Lands to him and to his heires Males begotten of the body of Ellenor his wife By vertue of which entaile John Lord Matrovers Earle of Arundell after the decease of Thomas then Earle which died without heire Male although the sisters of the said Thomas possessed divers Lands and honors or the which the said Thomas died seised in Fee simple war Earle of Arundell Richard Earle of Arundell Richard Earle of Arundell obiit anno 21. R. 2. Thomas Earle of Arundell obiit anno 3. H. 5. Elizabeth married to Tho. Mowbray Duke Norfolk Married to Lewthall Jane Lady of Abergany John Arundell Knight Lord Matrovers John Arund Lord Matrovers obiit 6. H. 4. Io. Arund L. Matrovers obiit 9. H. 5. Io. E. of Arun. by reason of the entail Thomas Lord Barkley was seised in his demesne as of fee of the Castle of Barkley and Mannour c. and a fine levied in the Kings Court 23 E. 3. of the aforesaid Castle Mannour c. to him for terme of his life remainder to Morrice his sonne and to the heires males of his body issuing with other remainders as aforesaid the which said Morrice had issue Thomas Lord Barkley and Iames Barkley Knight which Iames dyed in the life of his brother leaving Iames his sonne and heire living After the said Thomas Lord Barkley died Anno 5. H. 5. leaving Elizabeth his daughter and heir married to Richard Earle of Warwick after whose death Iames his Nephew on the brothers side entred into the Lands Castles and rem ' aforesaid by virtue of the entaile and was summoned among the Barons to the Parliament as Baron of Barkley 9. H. 5. which Elizabeth died in 1. H. 6. Tho. Lord Barkley Morrice Lo Barkley Tho. Lord Barkley Eliz. married to Rich Earle of Warwick Sir Ia. Barkley died before his brother Iames Lo. Barkley by reason of the entaile Thomas Lord Delaware died seised in his demesne as of fee taile to himselfe and to the heires males of his body issuing by reason of a fine levied in the time of his ancestors of the Barony Delaware with divers other lands in other counties and died 5 H. 6. without heires of his body and Reignold West Knight of the halfe blood was next heire by reason of the entaile aforesaid and was summoned to the Parliament by the name of Reignold Lord Delaware Knight although Iohn Griffith was heire generall of the aforesaid Thomas Delaware being of the whole blood as appeareth by the genealogie ensuing Iohn Lord Delaware son of Roger. Iohn Lord Delaware Elisabeth daughter to Adam L. Wels. Iohn Lord Delaware died without issue Thomas Lord Delaware died without issue Roger Lord Delaware Elisabeth daughter to the Lord Mowbray his second wife Iohn Griffin heire generall to the Lord Delaware Sir Reignold West Lord Delaware by the entail Katharine married to Nicolas Latimer Katharine married to Griffin Iohan married to Tho West Knight John de Vere Earle of Oxford seised in his demesne as of Fee taile to him and his heires Males of his body issuing of the honour and county of Oxford with divers other Lands Anno 18. H. 8. died without heires of his body and his three sisters were his next heires generall but Iohn de Vere his next heire Male as appeareth was Earle of Oxford by reason of the said entaile and none of the three sisters obtained Dignity Richard de Vere Earle of Oxford died 4. H. 5. Iohn de Vere Earle of Oxford died 1. E. 4. John de Vere Earle of Oxford died without issue 4. H. 8. George de Vere Knight Iohn de Vere Earl of Oxfo died without issue 18. H. 8. Eliz. married to Sir Antho Wingfield Knight Vrsula married to Edm. Knightley Esq Dorothy married to Nevill Sir Robert de Vere Kt. Iohn de Vere Iohn de Vere Iohn de Vere Earle of Oxford by vertue of the entaile William Lord Paget of

same Pedegree of the said Lord Dacres it is expressed that Thomas sometimes Lord Dacres had issue Thomas his eldest son Ralph his second sonne and Humphrey his third sonne Thomas the eldest dyed in the life time of his Father having Issue Ioan his daughter and heire who was marryed unto Sir Richard Fines Knight And after Thomas Lord Dacres her Grandfather and Father unto the said Sir Ralph and Humphrey dyed After whose death Henry 6. by his Letters Parents bearing date at Westminster 7. Novem. Anno 7. regni reciting the said Pedegree and Marriage doth by his Letter a Pattents accept declare and repute the said Richard Fines to be Lord Dacres and one of the Barons of his Realme But afterward in the time of Edw 4. the said Humphrey Dacres after the attaindor of the said Ralph and himselfe by an Act of Parliament which was in 1. Ed. 4. and after the death of the said Ralph and after the reversall of the same Act by another Act 12. Edw. 4. the said Humphrey made challenge unto the said Barony and to divers Lands of the said Thomas his Father whereupon both parties after their title had been considered in Parliament submitted themselves unto the Arbitrement of King Edw. 4. and entred into Bond each to other for the performance thereof Wherupon the said King in his award under his Privie seale bearing date at Westminster 8. April Anno regni 13. did award that the said Rich Fines in the right of Ioan his wife and the Heires of his body lawfully begotten should be reputed had named and called Lord Dacres and that the said Richard Fines and the Heires of his body by the said Ioane begotten should keepe have and use the same state and place in every Parliament as the said Thomas Dacres Knight late Lord Dacres had used kept c. that the heires of the body of the said Thomas Dacres Knight late Lord Dacres lawfully begotten should have and hold to them their Heires the Mannor of Holbech And furthermore the said King did award on the other part that the said Humphrey Dacres Knight and the Heires males of the said Thomas late Lord Dacres should be reputed had named and called the L. Dacres of Gillesland And that he and the heires males of the said Thomas then late Lord Dacres should have use and keepe the place in Parliament next adjoyning beneath the said place which the said Rich Fines Knight Lord Dacres then had and occupied and that the heires of the body of the said Ioan his wife should have and occupie And that the Heires males of the said Thomas Dacres late L. Dacres should have to them to the heires males of their bodies begotten the Mannor of Jothington c. And so note that the name of the ancient Barony namely Gilestand remained unto the Heire male unto whom the land was entailed Moreover this is specially observed if any Baron by writ doe dy having none other issue then Female and that by some speciall entail or other assurance there be an heire male which doth enioy all or a great part of the lands possessions and inheritances of such Barons deceased the Kings of this Realme have used to call to the Parliament by writ as Baron such heire male omitting the Husband or issue male of such heire female and this also appeareth by a notable controversie in the time of Henry 7. betweene Sir Robert Willoughby Lord Brooke and Richard Lord Latimer for the Barony of Latimer which in effect was The said Lord Brooke did challenge the Barony of Latimer as cosen and Heire to Elizabeth his great grandmother who was sister and heire to Iohn Nevill Lord Latimer who died without issue and hereupon exhibited a Petition to Henry 7. in Parliament whereto Richard then Lord Latimer was called to answer because he then enioyed the said title and dignity The said Richard Lord Latimer by his answer did shew that it was true that after the death of the said Iohn Nevill Lord Latimer dying without issue the said Elizabeth was the sister and next heire and married unto Sir Thomas Willlonghby Knight second son of the Lord VVilloughby but Henry 6. for that the said Iohn Nevill was dead without issue and that the next heire was female did therefore call to the Parliament George Nevill Knight second son of Ralph Earle of Westmerland to be Lord Latimer as Cozen and next heire male of the said Iohn Nevil Lord Latimer which George was grandfather of the said Richard Lord Latimer namely Father of Henry Lord Latimer Father of the said Richard In debate of which cause the question now in hand whether a Barony by writ may discend unto the heirea semales was advisedly considered of by the said King and his Nobility in Parliament and in the end adjudged with the said Richard Lord Latimer which President doth afford us two Iudgements in this point one in the time of Hen. 6. when the writ was directed to the said Sir George Nevill whereby he was summoned as Lord Latimer to the Parliament and as heire Male and not the said Sir Thomas Willoughby Knight husband of the said Eliza. heire male And the second judgement was given in the time of Henry 7. whereby the Barony was adiudged vnto the said Richard Lord Latimer comming of the speciall heire male against the said Lord Brooke descended of the generall heire male But here the President before remembred of the Barony of Dacres may be objected to incounter this confusion For there was an heire female martied unto Sir Richard Fines who by the declaration of Hen. 6. was Baron of Dacres in the right of his wife and there was also Ralph and Humfrey the heires males before whom the heire female was preferred by the censure of Henry 6. and Edward 4. This objection is easily answered For although Hen. 6. through the Princely favour which hee bare unto Sir Richard Fines had declared him to bee Lord Dacres in the right of his wife yet notwithstanding did Ralph Dacres being heire male unto the then Lord Dacres deceased beare also the name of 〈◊〉 Dacres and by that name was attainted in Parliament Wherefore the reason why the heire male could not bee regarded was the said attainder of the said Ralph and Humfrey his brother and therefore when Humphrey 12. Edw. 4. laboured to have the said attainder reversed he submitted himselfe vnto the Arbitrament of the King who to satisfie both Competitors because both had well deserved of him after he had admitted them to his favour he allowed the one to be Lord Dacres the other to be Lord Dacres of Gillesland thus much concerning the second point whether a Barony by writ may discend unto the heire female or not As concerning the third point admitting such discent to bee to the heire female when there is no heire male at all that may claime the same for then doth this question take place whether the husband of such heire

Nobiles non torquentur in quibus plebeij torquerentur nobiles non suspenlantur sed decapitantur and so it is almost growne into a Custome in England by the favour of the Prince for rare is it to have a Nobleman executed in other forme yet Thomas Fines Lord Dacres of the South in 33. H. 8. and Lord Sturton 4. Mar. were hanged Brooke Iury 48. Jn the first yeare of the late Queene Eliz cap. 1. in the Acts of Parliament for the uniformity of Common Prayer c. there is contained this proviso and be it enacted and ordained that all the Lords of Parliament for the third offence above mentioned shall bee tryed by their Peeres and not by any Ecclesiasticall Courts reade the Statute at large At the Common Law it was lawfull for any Nobleman or ignoble to retaine as many Chaplaines as hee would for their Instruction in Religion but by a Statute made 21. Hen. 8. cap. 13. A restraint was made and a certaine number onely allowed to the Nobility and such Chaplaines for their attendance have Immunities as by the Statute at large may appeare viz Every Archbishop and Duke may have sixe Chaplaines whereof every one shall or may purchase Lycence or dispensation and take receive and keepe two Personages or Benefices with cure of Soules and that every Marquesse or Earle may have five Chaplaines whereof every one may purchase Lycence or Dispensation and take receive and keepe two Parsonages or Benefices with cure of Soules and that every Viscount and other Bishop may have foure Chaplaines whereof every one may purchase Lycence and receive have and keepe two Parsonages or Benefices with cure of Soules as aforesaid And that the Chancellour of England for the time being and every Baron and Knight of the Garter may have three Chaplaines whereof every one shall now purchase Lycence and Dispensation and receive have and keepe two Benefices with cure of Soules read the Statute at large And forasmuch as retaining of Chaplaines by Lords of great estates is ordinary and neverthelesse some questions in Law have beene concerning the true understanding of the said Statute J thinke it not impertinent to set downe some subsequent resolutions of the Judges touching such matters If a Bishop be translated to an Archbishop or a Baron to be created to an Earle c. yet within this Act they can have but onely so many Chaplaines as an Archbishop or Earle might have for although he have divers dignities yet he is still but one selfe-same person to whom the Attendance and service ●ould be done so if a Baron be made a Knight of the ●arter or Lord Warden of the Cinque-Ports hee ●all have but three Chaplaines in all sic de simi●●us Also if such an Officer allowed by the Statute to ●●ve one two or more Chaplaines doe retaine accor●ingly and after he is removed from his Office in this ●●se he cannot be now non-resident or accept of a se●ond Benefice if his Compliment were not full ●efore his remaining and yet in that case it behoveth ●●e Chaplaine to procure a non obstante otherwise ●e may be punished for his non-residency So if an Earle or Baron doe retaine a Chaplaine ●nd before his advancement his Lord is attainted of Treason as it was in the Case of the Earle of ●estmerland after the said Attainder such a Chap●aine cannot accept a second Benefice for though his Lord be still living according to nature yet after the Attainder he is a dead Person in the Law and therefore out of the case to have Priviledge for himselfe or for his Chaplaines If a Baron have three Chaplaines and every one of them have two Benifices and after the Baron dyeth yet they shall enjoy those benefices with cure which were lawfully setled in them before but in this case though the said Chaplaine be resident upon one of his Benifices yet now he is become unpunishable for being non-resident upon the other for cessante causa ces● effectus the same Law is if a Baron be attainted of tre●son or Fellony or if any Officer be removed from 〈◊〉 Office Et sic de similibus vide Actons Case Cooke 〈◊〉 part Fol. 117. for all those matters A Baron or others of degree of Honour doe retain● such number of Chaplains as are allowed by the Statute and after upon suite and request the said noble perso● doth retaine more Chaplaines In this Case they that are first retayned shall onely have priviledge nam qui prior est tempore potior est Iure● so if a Lord doe at any time retayne more Chaplai●● then are allowed by the Common Law the lawfull number onely shall have priviledge and in this case which of them first promoted shall have priviledge and the rest are excluded for in equali Iure inelior est condi●●● possidentes Jf a Nobleman doe retayne Chaplaines above the number at severall times if any of his first Chaplai●● die the next that was then retayned shall not succeed for his first retayner was void and therefore in thi● Case it doth behove him to have a new retayning after the death of the predecessour and before his advancement nam quod initio non valet in tractu temporis non co●valescit If a noble person retaine such a number of Chaplains as is by the Law allowed him but afterward upon some dislike or other cause doe discharge some of them from their attendance or service the Lord in this case cannot retaine others thereby to give them priviledge during the life of them so retained and discharged and the reason thereof is because the first Chaplaines were lawfully retained and by virtue thereof during their lives might purchase dispensations to have advantage according to the statute and therefore if the discharge of their service and attendance might give a liberty to the Lord to retaine others by such meanes the Lords might advance Chaplains without number by which the statute should be defrauded and the said statute must be construed strictly against non-Residents and Pluralities as a thing prejudiciall to the service of God and the ordinary instruction of the people of God These premises are to be read in Cooks 4 part fol. 90. Druries case By the statute of 3. H. 7. cap. 14. it is enacted as followeth viz. Forasmuch as by quarrels made to such as have been in great authority office and of counsell with the King of this Realme hath ensued the destruction of the King and thereby the undoing of this Realme so that it hath appeared evidently when the compassing of the death of such as were the Kings true subjects was laid the destruction of the Prince was imagined thereby and for the most part it hath growne and been occasioned by envie and malice of the Kings owne houshold servants and for that by the lawes of this land if actuall deeds were not there was no remedy for such false compassing imaginations and confederacies had against any Lord or any of the Kings

heires which Judgement was that the said Earldome should bee divided amongst the said copartners as other lands and that the eldest should not have it alone 23. H. 3. Fitz. partic 18. But this judgement was holden erroneous even in those times wherein it was given For Bracton a learned Judge who lived in that age thus writeth thereof treating of Partition among Copartners lib. 2. cap. 34 fol. 76. b. De hoc autem quod dicitur quod de feodo militare veniunt in divisione capitalia messuagia inter cohaeredes dividuntur hoc verum est nisi capitale messuagium illud sit caput comitatus propter jus gladis quod dividi non potest vel caput Baroniae castrum vel aliud aedificium hoc ideo ne sit caput per plures particulas dividetur plura jura Comitat ' Baroniarum deveniant ad nihilum per quod deficiat regnum quod ex Comitatibus Baroniis dicitur esse constitutum Si autem plura sunt aedisicia quae sunt capita Baronia dividi possunt inter cohaeredes facta electione salvo jure essentiae quia cùm plura sunt ibi jura quodlibet per se poterit integrè observare quod quidem non est in uno ut praedictum est licèt à quibusdam dicatur quòd in aliis regionibus aliquando de consuetudine dividatur sed quod nunquam divids debeat in Anglia videtur nec visum fuit contrarium erit consuetudo regionis observanda ubi haereditas quae petitur personae nascuntur quae petunt unde sic dicatur quòd in regno Anglia aliquando facta fuit partitio hoc fuit injustum It is therefore evident that Baronies and dignities of Honour do by the Lawes of this Realm descend unto the eldest Coapercener and the Iudgement given once to the contrary thereof Bracton doth rightly account to be unjust his reason is notable for in as much as the honour of the Chivalry of the Realme doth chiefly consist in the Nobility reason would not that such dignitie should be divided amongst Coaparceners whereby through multitude of partitions the reputation of Honour in such succession and so divided might be impaired or the strength of the Realme being drawne into many hands with the decrease of livelihood by partition should be enfeebled in which Resolution Britton the learned Bishop of Hereford who compiled his Booke of the Lawes of the Realme by the commandement and in the name of E. 1. according Britton 187. and therefore howsoever that Judgement was given or whensoever it is neverthelesse very evident that it was soone redressed for if it were given upon the death of Renulph the last of that name the Earle of Chester who dyed about 17. H. 3. without issue the Writers of that time doe testifie that the Earledome of Chester came wholly unto Iohn Scot the sonne of David Earle of Huntington and Anguish and of Maud the eldest sister of the said Renulph if it were given upon the death of the said Iohn Scot who dyed without issue about 14. H. 7. yet notwithstanding the said Judgement stood not in force for that the said King assumed the said Earledome into his owne hands upon other satisfaction made to the sisters Coparceners of the said Iohn Scot. Ne tanta hereditas colos deduceretur Matth. Paris Monast S. Albani in Arr. fol. 3.66 B. tamen vido Vill. fol. 75. et Ioh. Guill 78. For this it is to be observed out of Presidents and to be acknowledged of every dutiful Subject that the King is at liberty to call and advance to honour whom his Highnesse shall in his Princely wisdome thinke most meet and therfore whereas Ralph Lord Cromwell being a Baron by Writ dyed without issue having two sisters and co-heires Elizabeth the eldest married unto Sir Thomas Nevill Knight and Ioane the younger married unto Sir Hunt Burther hee who married the younger sister was called unto the Parliament as Lord Cromwell and not the said Sir Thomas Nevill who had married the eldest sister and Hugh Lupus the first and great Earle of Chester was by the Conquerour his Uncle creared Earle of Chester Habemus sibi heredibus adeo libere per gladium sicut ipse Rex tenuit Angliam per Corenam Hugh dyed without issue and the inheritance of his Earledome was divided amongst his foure sisters and the eldest had not the Seigniory entire unto her selfe Reade Mills 74 75. Cookes b. part 53. 7. part 15. If a Woman be Noble by birth or by discent with whomsoever she doth marry though her Husband bee under her degree yet she doth remaine Noble for her Birthright Est Character in delibilis Cook 4. part 118. b. 6. part 53. b. Other Women are enobled by Marriage and the text saith thus viz. Women with the honour of their Husbands and with the kindred of their Husbands we worship them in the Court we decree matters to passe in the name of their Husbands and into the house and sirname of their Husbands wee doe translate them but if afterwards a woman doe marry with a man of baser degree then loseth she her former Dignitie and followeth the condition of her latter Husband Fortescue de laudibus legum Angl. 100. And as concerning the second disparaged Marriage as aforesaid many other bookes of the law doe agree for these bee rules received in those Cases Si mulier nobilis nupserit ignobili desit esse nobilis eadem modo quo quidem Constitut dissolvitur Cookes 6. part 53. B. 4. part 118. It was the Case of Ralph Hayward Esquire who tooke to his wife Anne the widdow of the Lord Powes they brought an Action against the Duke of Suffolke by the name of Ralph Hayward Esquire and the Lady Anne Powes his wife and exception was taken for misnaming her because shee ought to have beene named by the Husbands Name and not otherwise and the exception was by the Court allowed For said they by the Law of God shee is Sub potestate viri and by our Law her Name of Dignitie shall bee changed according to the degree of her Husband notwithstanding the curresies of the Ladies of Honour and Court Dyer 79. And the like was also in Queene Maries Raigne when the Dutchesse of Suffolke tooke to her Husband Adrian Stoakes Prob. 4 5 6. and many other presidents have beene of latter time and herewith agreeth the Civill Law punctually Digest lib. 1. Tit. 9. Lege 8. Eodem de Dignitate Liber 12. Lege 2. In this case of acquired Nobility by Marriage of Question in Law be whereupon an issue is taken betweene the parties that is to say Dutchesse or not Dutchesse Countesse or not Countesse Baronesse or not Baronesse the tryall hereof shall not be by Record as in the former case but by a Jury of 12. men and the reason of the diversity is because in this case the Dignity is accrewed unto her by marriage which the

Bewdesert was seised in his demesn as of fee of the Baronies of Langden and Hawood and of and in the Mannours of Bewdesert Landen c. And being so seised by fine quinto Mariae entailed the Baronies and Mannours aforesaid to him and his heires males of his body issuing And afterward Anno 5. Eliz. died leaving Henry his sonne next heire male Which Henry entred into the Baronies and land aforesaid by vertue of the foresaid fine and died thereof seised 11. Eliz. leaving Elizabeth his onely daughter and heire After whose death Thomas Paget brother and heire male of the said Henry entred into the Baronies and Mannours aforesaid and was summoned to the Parliament by virtue of the aforesaid fine William Lord Paget of Bewdesert deed anno 5. Eliz. Henry Lord Paget died An. 11. Eliz. Elizabeth his daughter and heire Thomas Lord Paget by force of the entailes after the death of his brother Robert Lord Ogle entred into the Barony of Bothal and Ogle with divers other Mannors and Lands in the County of Northumberland by conveiance which was to himselfe for terme of his life the remainder to the heires males of his body begotten and he took to his wife Dorothy Witherington by whom he had issue Robert Ogle his eldest sonne and Margery his daughter married Gregory Ogle of Chippington And the said Robert the father after the death of the said Dorothy his wife took to his second wife Ioane Ratcliffe by whom he had issue Cutbert his second sonne and after died After whose death Robert the sonne was Lord Ogle from whom the same descended to Cutbert being brother of the halfe blood by vertue of the said entaile and not to the said Margery nor unto her heires being of the whole blood unto the said Robert the sonne Robert Ogle Lord Ogle Dorothy daughter of Henry Withrington first wife Robert Ogle L. Ogle died without issue Margery maried to Ogle of Chippington Cutbert Ogle of Chippington Cutbert Ogle L. Ogle died Margery Ogle married Robert Witherington Thomas Ogle Joan the daughter of Cuthbort Ratcliff Kni. the second wife Moreover concerning the second objection it is very true that many ancient Mannours which were anciently holden by Barony as the head or parcell of a Barony are now in the hands of Gentlemen meane and un-noble by blood who neither doe nor may claime any Nobility or honour thereby But the reason that some former gifts made by the Kings Majesties progenitours the supreme Soveraignes of this Realme to such as they honoured in augmentation and support of their honour and by honourable services should thus come to the hands of mean pers●nages are twofold First for that such Mannours have been aliened by licence unto such persons before spoken whom such possessions alone cannot make noble Secondly and that was usually such Mannours as were holden by Barony have upon divers encheasons and occasions come to the Crowne by way of revertor or eschete or forfeit by meanes whereof the ancient tenures derived from the Crowne by reason of those lands so comming again to the Crown were extinct and after the said lands were given or conveyed to others reserving other services than those which at the first were due for the same so that it was no marvaile to see that some Mannours anciently holden by Barony or other honourable service should now bee holden in soccage or by other triviall or meane tenure As to that which was thirdly objected that some ancient Barons there are which have aliened and sold away those Castle and Mannours of the which they have and doe beare the name and dignity and yet neverthelesse themselves doe still retaine and keep lawfully their estate dignity and degree of a Baron and have been and are called to the Parliament such alienation notwithstanding To this I answer That it is true but it proveth nothing against the former resolution And therefore for better satisfaction of this observation it is to be considered that such Barons either be originally Barons by writ or Barons by tenure Barons by writ in this respect now in hand are of two kindes For either in such writ whereby they or their Ancestors were at first summoned they were named onely by their owne names or else there was addition given them of the principall place of their aboad which was done either for distinction sake to sever them from some honourable person of the same surname or else to give them such honourable title by addition of the place which place notwithstanding was not holden by Barony And therefore if such a Baron doe alien away that place which anciently was his seat he may neverthelesse retain his honourable title in respect had of such a place But if a Baron by tenure doe alien away the honourarable Castle or Mannour holden by Barony unto a mean person not capable of honour and that by sufficient licence so to doe and after the alienour which made such alienation be called by writ to the Parliament under the title or as Baron of such Honour Castle or Mannour so aliened he is not any more a Baron by tenure in respect of that place for that he hath aliened that away which he held by Barony but thenceforth after such writ of summons he is become a Baron by writ and may retaine the name of Baron by title of the place as Baron by writ such alienation notwithstanding forasmuch as the writ directed at the pleasure of the Prince doth give unto him that addition of name and dignity And thus much touching the resolution of the said question and satisfaction of the said objections and of Barons by tenure BARONS by writ which is the second kind of Barons mentioned in the former Divisions of BARONS A Baron by writ is he unto whom a writ of summons in the name of the King is directed to come to the Parliament appoin●ed at a certaine time and place to be holden and there with his Highnesse the Prelates Nobility and Peeres to treat and advise touching the waighty affairs of the Realme The forme of which writ is much to the effect of the writ before mentioned in the title of Earle which kind of writ is as well directed to the Barons by tenure as Barons by creation Patent or otherwise But those which are not Barons by tenure nor by Patent and have onely such writs are therefore called Barons by writ and upon receipt of such writ and place taken accordingly in Parliament ought to enjoy the name dignity and honour of a Baron Touching the antiquity of Barons by writ onely and their first institution I finde little or no mention before the time of H. 3. And therefore I conceive that either the first of all or at least that the first frequent use of such Barons was had and devised 49. H. 3. in case of necessity and upon a lamentable occasion For in the discord between the King and his Nobility in those troublesome warres seditions and rebellions which they moved

for the saving of his tenancy being minded to pay all the arrerages before judgment given against him as by the Law hee ought to doe in this case hee must come in proper person and not by Atturney 15. H. 7.9 b. If a noble man in contempt of any processe which hath beene awarded from out of any the Kings Courts doth make rescous and wilfully doth refuse to obey the said writ and the same his offence doth appeare of record to the Court by the Sheriffs returne there may be and shall be awarded against him a Capias 1 H. 5. Case ult 27 H. 8.22 Cooks 6. part 54. If any Lord doe depart this Realm as Ambassadour or otherwise by the Kings lincence or without licence and doe not returne at the Kings Commandement or upon the Kings writ under his privy Signet the King may seize his lands goods and chattells Dyer 108. b. 17. the Dutchesse of Suffolks case If a Lord arrested upon a Supplicavit for the peace doe wilfully refuse to obey the arrest and make rescous upon his returne shall issue an attachment against the said Lord for his contempt to take his body and this is the way to obtaine peace against any Lord of the Parliament whereas the party could not have an attachment against him if the Subpoena had beene duly served and peaceably accepted although the said Lord had not appeared thereunto Cromptons Justice of Peace 134. If a Lord of the Parliament doth with force and arms detaine a man in prison in his House or elsewhere the remedy is in such cases by himselfe or his friends abroad at liberty to have a writ called de homine replegiando to deliver him but if the Lord to prevent the execution thereof and of malice doe keep or convey away this man so wrongfully imprisoned so privily as that the Sheriffe cannot execute his said writ then will the Court award a Witheram whereby the Sheriffe shall attach and arrest the body of the said Lord and imprison him untill he doe deliver his said prisoner 11 H. 4.15 All Lords are compellable to take the Oath mentioned in the Statute of 3 Jac. 4. vide the Statute 7 Jac. cap. 6. who have authority to minister the said Oath to them Bracton lib. 5. fol. 337.6 H. 3. 351. writing of essoines delivereth this learning that if a Baron that holdeth by Baron tenure have his absence excused by essoine he which casteth such essoine or excuse ought to finde surety that the said essoine is true but in case of common persons it shall rest upon the credit and integrity of the Essoince and so is the use at this day The Statute of magna charta cap. 1 a. is quod liber homo non amercietur pro parvo delicto nisi secundum modum illius delicti pro magno delicto secundum magnitudinem delicti nulla praedictarum miscricordiarum ponatur nisi per Sacramentum proborum legalium hominum de vicinate and accordingly is the Law thereunto at this day But the subsequent words in the said Statute viz. Comites Barones non amercientur nisi per pares suos non nisi secundum modum delicti are not in use for whether the offence be great or small for which they are to be amerced their amercement must be certaine viz. of a Duke ten pound and of any other of the Nobility Also whereas the amercement should be offered per pares the use is to offer them by the Barons of the Exchequer Cooks 8. Rep. 40. Bracton lib. 3. Tractat. 2. cap. 1. fol. 116. b. When a Peere of the Realme is arraigned in Appeale of Fellony he shall not have that priviledge to bee tried by his Peere as he should in case of Inditement but must undergoe the ordinary triall of twelve men Stamford Pleas of the Crowne lib. 3. cap. 1. Brook triall 142. Ferdinando Poulton 188. b. Read the book of Entries title appeale Sect. 7. also in Case of an Inditement the Defendant though a Peere of the Realme may not challenge any of his Triers either peremptorily or upon causes which in like cases permitted to all other common persons The Judgement to be given against any Lord of the Parliament in case of Felony or Treason shall be no other than according to the usuall judgement given against common persons and although the execution be not pursuant but with the losse only of their heads yet that is by the speciall grace of the King and not ex debito as by the examples of Thomas Lord Dacre 33. H. 8. and of the Lord Sturton 2 Mariae may appeare Brook tit Jury 48. By attainder of Treason or Fellony is corruption of blood so that their Children may not be heires unto them nor unto any of their Ancestors And if hee were a noble man before he is by the attainder made ignoble and not only himselfe but also his Children having no regard unto the Nobility which they had by their birth and this corruption is so strong and high that it cannot be saved by the Kings pardon or otherwise than by authority of Parliament Stamford Pleas del Coronae lib. 3. cap. 34. But here it is to bee observed that Nobility is not a thing substantiall but meere accidentall for that may be present or absent without corruption of the Subject whereof it dependeth for experience sheweth that the passage of honourable titles are restrained by exorbitant crimes when as nature in the meane while cannot bee thrust away with a fork Wherefore although the Lawyers doe terme and call that extinguishment of Nobility which hapneth by such hainous offences committed as corruption of blood neverthelesse they use not this manner of phrase and speech as though Nobility were naturally and essentially in the humour of blood more than any other hereditary faculty but because the right of inheritance which is by degree of communication of blood directed is by that meanes determined and ended and also in regard of the hatred and detestation of the crime it is called corruption of blood note in Dyer 16. Eliz. 332. the Lord Charles Howards case If one be made a Knight in a forraigne Kingdome by a forraigne Knight yet he is to be so stiled in this Realme in all legall proceedings but if a man be created by the Emperour an Earle of the Empire or into any other title of dignity he shall not beare this title here in England Cooks 7. part 16.20 E. 46. If there be a Father and Sonne and the Father is seised of lands holden in Capite or otherwise by knightly service the King doth create the same Duke and Earle or of any other degree of Nobility and afterwards the Father dieth his Sonne being within the age of one and twenty yeares he shall be in ward but if the King had made him Knight in the life of his Father he should not have beene in ward after the death of his Father neither for the lands descended