to the Crown of England shall bear his Coronet of Crosses and Flower de lis with one Arch and in the midst a Ball and Cross as hath the Royal Diadem That his Royal Highness the Duke of York and all the immediate Sons and Brothers of the Kings of England shall use and bear their Coronets composed of Crosses and Flower de lis only But all their Sons respectively having the Title of Dukes shall bear and use their Coronets composed of Leaves only as the Coronets of Dukes not being of the Royal Blood Note That by Order not Creation our present King was admitted Prince of Wales had the Principality with the Earldom of Chester c. confirmed to him by Patent and was allowed to hold his Court apart from the Kings The Prince by the Common Law is reputed as the same Person with the King and so declared by Statute temp Hen. 8. The Civilians say the King 's eldest Son during his Fathers life may be styled King by the Law of Nations because of his so near Relation to the Crown that if the Father die he is ipso momento Rex though he be not crowned A usual custome in Spain and once allowed here to Henry Son of King Henry the Second yet he holdeth his Seigniories and Principalities of the King as Subject to him and giveth the same respect to him as other Subjects do He hath certain priviledges above other persons To him it was permitted by the Statute 24 Hen. 8. cap. 13. to wear Silk of the colour of Purple and cloth of Gold of Tissue in his Apparel or upon his Horse And by the Statute 24 Ed. 3. ca. 2. Takings shall not be from henceforth made by others than the Purveyors of the King of the Queen and of the Prince their eldest Son And that if any mans Purveyor make such takings it shall be done of them as of those that do without Warrant and the Deed adjudged as a thing done against the Peace and the Law of the Land and such as do not in manner aforesaid shall be duly punished To eschew Maintenance and nourish Peace and Amity in all parts of the Realm many Statutes have been made in the Reign of King Henry the Fourth prohibiting the giving of Signs or Liveries to any but Menials nevertheless by the Statute 2 Hen. 4. cap. 21. it is provided that the Prince may give his honourable Liveries or Sign to the Lords or to his Menial Gentlemen and that the same Lords may wear the same as if they were the King's Liveries and that the Menials of the Prince may also wear the same as the King's Menials But afterwards by occasion of divers other Statutes made by sundry Kings for the suppressing oâ— that enormity of Maintenance and of the general word in them that priviledge of the Prince was abridged or rather taken away therefore the Statute 12 Ed. 4. cap. 4. was made By the Statute 21 H. 8. cap. 13. the Prince may retain as many Chaplains as he pleaseth although all other of the Nobility except those of the Blood Royal are constrained to a certain number and they or any of them may purchase Licence and Dispensation and take and retain two Parsonages or Benefices with Cure of Souls By the Order of the Common Law the King may Levy a reasonable Ayd of all his Tenants as well of those that did hold their Lands of him by Knights Service as in Soccage pur faire fitz Chevalier pur File marrier and the sum of Money was not in certainty Note that the Ayd is not to be recovered before the Son be of the Age of Fifteen years and the Daughter accomplish the Age of Seven years Fitz. Natur. B. 28.6 But in the King's pleasure till by the Statute in the 25 Ed. 3. cap. 11. it was Enacted That for the Knighting his eldest Son and marrying his eldest Daughter as aforesaid the Ayd following shall be demanded and levied viz. of every Knight so holden of the King without mean 20 s. and no more and of every 20. l. of Land holden of the King without mean in Soccage 20 s. and no more And so after this rate for the Lands in Soccage and for Land in Tenure of Chivalry according to the quantity of the Fee By another Statute made in the said 25 th of Edward the Third cap. 2. amongst other things it is declared That to compass or imagine the death of the King 's eldest Son and Heir is Crimen laesae Majestatis or if a man do violate the Wife of the King 's eldest Son and Heir it is High Treason And so the Statute 26 Hen. 8. cap. 13. doth declate And so was the ancient Common Law of this Realm and not a new Law made by the Statute Coke 8. part 28. b. but this Statute is a Manifestation and Application of the ancient Common Law in this Case Because the people were in ambiguity Whether Children born in parts beyond the Sea and out of the King's Dominions should be able to demand any Inheritance within his said Dominions or not It was declared at a Parliament holden at Westminster in the Seventeenth of King Iames for the removing of those doubts That les Enfants du Roy the Children of the Kings of England in whatsoever parts they are born in are able and ought to bear the Inheritance after the death of their Ancestors Read the Statute in Coke's Seventh Part 8. a. where you shall see that though generally the Birth-place is observed yet many times Legiance and Obedience without any place in the King's Dominions may make a Subject born For we see by Experience almost in every Parliament that Ambassadors Merchants and the King's Souldiers do sue therein in such Cases to have their Children Naturalized or made Denisons And in the Articles confirmed by Parliament touching the Marriage between Philip King of Spain and Queen Mary Anno primo Parliamenti 2. cap. 2. a special Proviso was to bar him from being Tenant by the Courtesie of the Crown in case he should have Issue by her and survive which was superfluous because the Common Law would have denied it For this last point see the Lord Chancellor's Speech in the Case Postnati f. 36. But note If an Alien Enemy come into this Realm and his Wife English or Stanger be here delivered of a Child this Child notwithstanding his Birth-place is an Alien born for want of Allegiance in the Parents ibid. King Henry the Third did create Edward his eldest Son the first Prine of Wales and did give unto him the Dominion and Dignity thereof to be holden of him and his Heirs Kings of England And after that time the eldest Sons of the Kings of England have been Princes of Wales and as incident to the State and Dignity of a Prince did and might make Laws and Statutes and use Jurisdiction and Authority as amply as any King of that Nation could do for Wales was a Kingdom in ancient
time but by a Statute made the Twelfth of Edward the First Wales was incorporated and united to England and became part thereof Also by another Statute made 27 Hen. 8. c. 24. a general resumption of many Liberties and Franchises heretofore granted or taken from the Crown as the Authority to pardon Treasons Murder Manslaughter and Felony also power to make Justices in Oyer Justices of Assize Justices of the Peace Goal deliveries and such like so that from thenceforth the King 's eldest Son hath only the Name and Style of Prince of Wales but no other Jurisdiction than at the King's pleasure is permitted and granted him by his Letters Patents as by the tenor thereof here following made by King Henry the Eighth to Edward his Son and Heir apparent may appear HENRY by the Grace of God King of England and of France Lord of Ireland c. To all Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors Dukes Earls Barons Iustices Viscounts Governors Ministers and to all our Bayliffs and faithful Subjects Greeting Out of the Excellency of Royal Preheminence like leaves from the Sun so do inferior humours proceed neither doth the integrity of Royal Lustre and Brightness by the natural disposition of the Light affording Light feel any loss or detriment by such borrowed Lights yea the Royal Scepter is also much the more extolled and the Royal Throne exalted by how much the more Nobleness Preheminencies and Honours are under the power and command thereof And this worthy Consideration allureth and induceth us with desire to increase the Name and Honour of our Firstbegotten and best Beloved Son Edward in whom we behold and see our self to be honoured and our Royal House also and our people subject to us hoping by the grace of God by conjecture taken of his gracious future proceedings to be the more honourably strengthened that we may with honour prevent and with abundant grace prosecute him who in reputation of us is deemed the same with us Wherefore by the counsel and consent of the Prelates Dukes Earls Viscounts and Barons of our Kingdom being in our present Parliament We have made and created and by these Presents do make and create him the said Edward Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester And unto the same Edward do give and grant and by this Charter have confirmed the Name Style Title State Dignity and Honour of the said Principality and Connty that he may therein in Governing Rule and in Ruling direct and defend we say by a Garland upon his Head by a Ring of Gold upon his Finger and a Verge of Gold have according to the manner invested him to have and to hold to him and his Heirs the Kings of England for ever Wherefore we will and command for us and our Heirs that Edward our Son aforesaid shall have the Name Style Title State Dignity and Honour of the Principality of Wales and of the County of Chester aforesaid unto him and his Heirs the Kings of England for ever These being Witnesses the Reverend Father John Cardinal and Archbishop of Canterbury Primate of England our Chancellor and William Archbishop of York Primate of England Thomas Bishop of London John Bishop of Lincoln William Bishop of Norwich our most well beloved Cosins Richard Earl of Warwick Richard Earl of Salisbury John Earl of Wiltshire and our well beloved and faithful Ralph Cromwel Chamberlain of our House William Falconbridge and John Stourton Knights Dated at our Palace at Westminster the 15th day of March and in the year of our Reign 32. And here by the way may be observed That in ancient time and in the time of the English-Saxon Kings the use was as well in pennings of the Acts of Parliament as of the King's Letters Patents when any Lands Franchises or Hereditaments did pass from the King of any Estate of Inheritance as also in the Creations of any man unto Honour and Dignity the Conclusion was with the sign of the Cross in form aforesaid his testibus c. But long since that form hath been discontinued so that at this day and many years past the King's Patents for Lands Franchises and Hereditaments do conclude with Teste me ipso Nevertheless in all Creations of Honour and Dignity of Letters Patents the ancient form of concluding His testibus is used at this day And it hath been resolved by the Judges of all Acts of Parliament and Statutes which do concern the Prince who is the Firstbegotten Son of the King and Heir apparent to the Crown for the time being perpetuis futuris temporibus be such Acts whereof the Judges and all the Realm must take Cognizance as of General Statutes For every Subject hath interest in the King and none of his Subjects who are within his Laws be divided from him being he is Head and Sovereign so that the business and things of the King do concern all the Realm and namely when it doth concern the Prince the Firstbegotten Son of the King and Heir apparent to the Crown Although the Prince by express words hath no priviledge by the Great Charter of the Forestâ— 9 Hen. 3. cap. 11. for hunting in the King's Forests or Parks passing by them and sent for by the King's Command yet the Prince is to take the benefit and advantage thereby as well as the Earls Bishops or Barons who are expressed Crompton's Courts des Iustices de Forest 167. In the Parliament 31 Hen. 8. cap. 10. an Act concerning the placing of King's Children and Lords in the Parliament and other Assemblies was amongst other things made as followeth That no person or persons of what degree estate or condition soever his or they be of except only the King's Children shall at any time hereafter attempt to sit or have place on any side of the Cloth of Estate in the Parliament Chamber whether his Majesty be there personally present or absent The Prince shall not find Pledges for the prosecution of any Action and therefore shall not be amerced no more than the King or Queen should be The Prince is a distinct person from the King he is a Subject and holdeth his Principalities and Seigniories of the King and subject to the Law of the Land as a Subject And in token of the Prince's subjection he doth not upon his Posie in his Arms disdain the old Saxon words Ich Dieu I serve And there is a Case that Glascoine Chief Justice of England in the time of Henry the Fourth did commit the Prince who would have taken a Prisoner from their Bar in the King's Bench And the Prince did humbly submit himself and go at his Command And this did much rejoyce the King to see that he had a Judge so bold to administer Justice upon his Son and that he had a Son so gracious as to obey his Laws The Exercises befitting Princes whilst they are young are Chivalry and Feats of Arms and to adjoyn therewith the knowledge of the Law and God For it is the Duty and
Authority of Parliament made in the Eleventh of King Edward aforesaid and therefore to supply that defect in the Fifth of Edward the Third he was created Duke of Cornwall by special Charter Elizabeth eldest Daughter of King Edward the Fourth was not a Dutchess of Cornwall although she was the Firstbegotten Daughter of Edward the Fourth for the Limitation is to the First-begotten Son Henry the Eighth was not in the life of his Father King Henry the Seventh after the death of his eldest Brother Arthur Duke of Cornwall by force of the said Creation for although he was sole Heir apparent yet he was not his eldest begotten Son And the Opinion of Stamford a Learned Judge hath been That he shall have within his Dukedom of Cornwall the King's Prerogative because it is not severed from the Crown after the form as it is given for none shall be Inheritor thereof but the King 's of the Realm For example whereas by Common Law if a man hold divers Mannors or other Lands or Tenements of divers Lords all by Knights Service some part by Priority and ancient Feoffment and other Land by Posterity and a later Feoffment and the Tenant so seized dieth and his Son and Heir within Age in this case the custody and wardship of the Body and his marriage may not be divided amongst all the Lords but one of them only shall have right unto it because the Body of a man is intire And therefore the Law doth say That the Lord of whom some part of those Lands are holden by Priority and by the same Tenure of Chivalry shall have it except the King be any of the Lords for then though the Tenant did purchase that Land last yet after his death the King shall be preferred before any of the other Lords of whom the Tenant did hold the Priority And so shall the Duke of Cornwall in the same Case have the Prerogative if his Tenant die holding of him but by posterity of Feoffment for any Tenure of his Dutchy of Cornwall although the same Duke is not seized of any particular Estate whereof the Reversion remaineth in the King for the Prince is seized in Fee of his Dukedom as beforesaid Iohn of Gaunt the fourth Son of King Edward the Third took to Wife Blanch Daughter and Heir of Henry Duke of Lancaster who had Issue Henry King of England so that the said Dutchy of Lancaster did come unto the said Henry by descent from the party of his Mother and being a Subject he was to observe the Common Law of the Realm in all things concerning his Dutchy For if he would depart in Fee with any thereof he must have made Livery and Seisin or if he had made a Lease for life reserving Rent with a Re-entry for default of payment and the Rent happen to be behind the Duke might not enter without making his Demand or if he had alienated any part thereof whilst he was within Age he might defeat the Purchaser for that Cause and if he would grant a Reversion of an Estate for life or years in being there must also be Attornment or else the Grant doth not take effect But after that he had deposed King Richard the Second and did assume the Royal Estate and so had conjoyned his Natural Body in the Body Politick of the King of this Realm and so was become King then the possession of the Dutchy of Lancaster was in him as King but not as Duke which degree of Dignity was swallowed up in that of the King for the lesser must always give place to the greater And likewise the Name of the Dutchy and the Franchises Liberties and Jurisdictions thereof when in the King's Hands were by the Common Law extinct and after that time the possessions of the Dutchy of Lancaster could not pass from Henry the Fourth by Livery of Seisin but by his Letters Patents under the Great Seal without Livery of Seisin and with Attornment And if he make a Lease for Life being Duke reserving a Rent with a Re-entry for default of payment and after his Assumption of the Crown his Rent happen to be unpaid he might Re-enter without Demand for the King is not bound to such personal Ceremonies as his Subjects are Therefore to have the said Dutchy to be still a Dutchy with the Liberties to the same as it was beâ—ore and to alter the order and degree of the Lands of the Dutchy from the Crown the said King Henry the Fourth made a Charter by Authority of Parliament which is entituled Charta Regis Hen. 4. de separatione Lancastriae à corona authoritate Parliamenti Anno Regni sui primo as by the Tenor thereof may appear And so by Authority of that Parliament the said Dutchy with all the Franchises and Liberties was meerly resigned from the Crown and from the Ministers and Officers thereof and from the Order to pass by such Conveyance which the Law did require in the possessions of the Crown But now the possessions of the Dutchy by force of the said Statute stood divided from the Crown and ought to be demeaned and ordered and pass as they did before Henry the Fourth was King yet there is no Clause in the Charter which doth make the person of the King who hath the Dutchy in any other Degree than it was before But things concerning his pleasure shall be in the same estate as they were before such separation insomuch as if the Law before the Charter by Authority of Parliament adjudged the person of the King always of full Age having regard unto his Gifts as well of the Lands which he doth inherit in the right of his Crown or Body Politick it shall be so adjudged for the Dutchy Land after the said Statute for the Statute doth go and reach unto the Estate Order and Condition of the Lands of the Dutchy but doth not extend unto the person of the King who hath the Lands in points touching his person Neither doth that distinguish or alter the preheminences which the Law doth give to the person of the King For if King Henry the Fourth after the said Act had made a Lease or other Grant of parcel of the Dutchy by the Name of Henry Duke of Lancaster only it had been void for it should have been made in the Name of Henry the Fourth King of England And thus stood the Dutchy of Lancaster severed from the Crown all the Reign of Henry the Fourth Henry the Fifth and Henry the Sixth being politickly made for the upholding of the Dutchy of Lancaster their true and ancient Inheritance however the right Heir to the Crown might in future time obtain his right thereunto as it happened in King Edward the Fourth's time but after the said King Edward obtained his right unto the Crown in Parliament he attainted Henry the Sixth and appropriated and annexed the said Dutchy again to the Crown as by the Statute thereof made in the first of the King's Reign
all true Wisdom And therefore our wise and religious Ancestors called to their General Council or Wittengemote or Court of Wisemen as they called it those chief and principal persons of the Clergy which by their places and professions by their Gravities Learning and Wisdom might best advise them what was the Law of God's acceptable will and pleasure that they might frame Laws answerable or at least wise not contrary and repugnant thereunto And touching the Temporal Barons by Tenure mention is made of them in the Books of Law Records and ancient Monuments of the Realm and these Baronies were anciently uncertain and rentable at the pleasure of the King But such incertainty was brought to certainty by the Statute of Magna Charta chap. 2. Bracton doth make express mention of Barons Temporal by Tenure it shall be needful here again to remember the former assertion of Bracton That the head of a Barony descending to Daughters should not be divided by partition which argueth likewise the Tenure of Barony But let us descend to other Authority viz. the Book-Case in the 48 Edw. 3. fol. 30. Sir Ralph Everdon's Case by which Case of Law 't is most evidently proved that there are Barons by Tenure which in regard of such their Tenure ought to be summoned to Parliament And furthermore That there were or are Barons by Tenure read the Statute of Westminster 2. cap. 41. where the Fees of the Earl-Marshal and the Lord Chamberlain are expressed which are to be taken by them upon the Homage done of every Baron by Tenure whether the Baron holdeth by a whole Barony or by a less But here ariseth a Question If a Baron by Tenure alien and grant away the Honour Castle and Mannor holden by Barony whether shall such Alien or Grauntee take upon him the State Title and Dignity of a Baron or not Or what shall become of such Dignity of Baronage after such Alienation and Grant made They which do deny that there are any such Baronies by Tenure do use these as their principal Motives or Reasons First If there be any Baronies by Tenure then the Alience or Grantee of such Honour Castle and Mannor so holden must hold by the same Tenure that his Grantor or Feoffer before held but that was by Barony therefore such Grantee must hold by Barony And if such Grant or Alienation be made to persons Vulgar or Ignoble then should such Tenure be made Noble which were very absurd and full of inconveniency for Ornanda potius est dignitate domus quam ex domo dignitas utcunque quibus quaerenda est ab iis honestanda Milles peroration 3. Secondly It is very evident and manife stthat many ancient Mannors which in old time were holden by Baronage and were the head of Baronies are now in the Tenures of mean Gentlemen and others who neither may nor do challenge unto themselves in any respect hereof any Nobility without the great favour of the King 's most Excellent Majesty who is the Fountain of all Honour within his Dominions Thirdly Some ancient Barons there are that have aliened and sold many of those Castles and Mannors which did bear the Name and Dignity of Baronage and yet themselves do still retain and lawfully keep their Estate Dignity and Degree of Baron and have been and usually are such Alienations notwithstanding summoned nevertheless to the Parliament and there do take and hold their ancient place accordingly To these Objections it shall be convenient for the more easie unfolding the sâ—ate of this Question to exhibit certain necessary distinctions and upon them to draw true and infallible Conclusions and then to prove them by authority of Law consent of Time and manifold Presidents which done the Answer will be presently made as I conceive to every of the aforesaid Objections First therefore If a Baron by Tenure which holdeth any Castle Honour or Mannor by Baronage do Alien oâ— give the same away he doth it either with or without a Licence obtained from his Majesty for the same If he doth it without a Licence then the Conclusion is certain But by the Laws of this Realm the Barony Honour Castle or Mannor so aliened without licence or consent is forâ—eited and the same Honour Castle and Mannor â—o â—olden by Barony and so aliened is to â—e seized in the King's hands and the â—aid Forfeiture and such Dignity and Estate no longer to be born and continue but to be resumed and extinguished in the Crown from whence it was derived The reason therefore is notable if we call to remembrance that which was formerly alledged out of Bracton That Baronies are the strength of the Realm and suffer no division they suffer also no alienation without the consent or licence of the Sovereign Monarch for so should the Realm be infeebled and base persons ennobled without desert of Vertue or Prowess For where the thing so aliened is an Honour or Head of a Barony it differeth much from the ordinary Tenure in Capite whereof if the Tenant make Alienation without Licence he is only to pay a Fine by the Statute of 1 Edw. 3. cap. 12. whereof also before the making of the Statute there was diversity of Opinions at the Common Law after the Statute of Magna Charta cap. 31. And for further proof see Glanvile In Edward the Third certain Lands being parcel of the Barony of Bremberway were aliened by William de Browse the Baron thereof without the King's Licence and in the Argument of the Case concerning the same Judge Green delivered this for Law First That parcel of a Barony or Earldom of the King in chief cannot be aliened or dismembred without his Licence and if it be it shall be seized into the King's hands as forfeited and the King shall be seized thereof in his own right again In 43 Edw. 3. it was found by an Office that William Bishop of Chester had leased unto one Iohn Preston for his Life a Mannor which was parcel of the Mannor of the said Bishoprick without Licence and it was resolved by the Judges and others of the King's Council That the same was forfeited but by mediation of the said Council the Bishop submitted himself to the King and made a Fine and several Scire Facias's issued out against them that had received the many proâ—its to answer unto the King thereof And thus much concerning Alienations of Baronies without Licence But on the other part if a Baron by Tenure who holds any Honour Castle or Mannor by Barony do grant or alien the same by Licence I must again distinguish for either such Alienation is made for the continuance of his Barony Honour Lands and Tenements in his own Name Blood and Issue Male or else the same Alienation is made for Money or other Recompence or otherwise to a meer Stranger and hereof ensueth this second Conclusion or Assertion That if such Alienation be made for the continuance of his Barony in his Name and Blood or Issue Male
Parliament by Writ as Baron such Heir Male omitting the Husband of the Issue of such Heir Female And this also appeareth by a notable Controversie in the time of Henry the Seventh between Sir Robert Willoughby Lord Brook and Richard Lord Lattimer for the Barony of Lattimer which in effect was The said Lord Brook did challenge the Barony of Lattimer as Coâ—in and Heir of Elizabeth his Great-grandmother who was Sister and Heir of Iohn Nevill Lord Lattimer who died without Issue And hereupon exhibited a Petition to Henry the Seventh in Parliament whereunto Richard Lord Lattimer was called to answer because he then enjoyed the said Title and Dignity The said Richard Lord Lattimer did by his Answer shew That after the death of the said Iohn Nevill Lord Lattimer without Issue the said Elizabeth was his Sister and next Heir and married unto Thomas Willoughby Knight second Son of the Lord Willoughby But Henry the Sixth for that the said Iohn Nevill Lord Lattimer was dead without Issue and that the next Heir was Female did therefore call to the Parliament George Nevill Knight second Son of Henry Earl of Westmoreland to be Lord Lattimer as Cosin and next Heir Male of the said Iohn Nevill Lord Lattimer which George was Grandfather of the said Richard Lord Lattimer Father of the said Richard In debate of which cause the Question now in hand namely Whether a Barony by Writ may descend to the Heirs Female was advisedly considered of by the King and his Nobility in Parliament and in the end adjudged with the said Richard Lord Lattimer which President doth afford us two Judgments in this point And in the time of Henry the Sixth when the Writ was directed to the said Sir George Nevill Knight whereby he was summoned as Lord Lattimer to the Parliament and as Heir Male and not the said Thomas Willoughby Knight husband of the said Elizabeth Heir Female And the second Judgment was given in the time of Henry the Seventh whereby the said Barony was adjudged to the said Richard Lord Lattimer coming out of the special Heir Male against the Lord Brook descended of the general Heir Male. But here in this President before remembred of the Barony of Dacres may be objected to encounter this Conclusion for there was an Heir Female married unto Sir Richard Fines who by the Declaration of King Henry the Sixth was Baron of Dacres in right of his wife And there was also Ralph and Humphrey the Heirs Males before whom the Heir Female was preferred by the censure of Henry the Sixth and Edward the Fourth This Objection is easily answered for although Henry the Sixth through the Princely favour which he bore unto Sir Richard Fines had declared him to be Lord Dacres in right of his wife yet notwithstanding did Ralph Dacres being Heir Male then unto the Lord Dacres and by that name was attainted in Parliament Anno primo Hen. 4. Wherefore the reason why the Heir Male could not be regarded was the said Attainder of the said Raâ—ph and Humphrey his brother and therefore when Humphrey in the 12 th of Edward the Fourth laboured to have the said Attainder Reversed he submitted himself to the Arbitrement of the King who to satisfie both Competitors both having deserved of him after he had admitted them to his favour he allowed one to be Lord Dacres and the other to be the Lord Dacres of Gillesland And thus much concerning the second Point Whether a Barony by Writ may descend unto the Heir Female The third Point As concerning the third Point admitting such Descent to be to the Heir Female when there is no Heir Male that may claim the same for then doth this Question take place Whether the husband of such an Heir Female shall enjoy the Dignity in right of his wife or no Wherein we are to rest upon a Resolution had and given to this special Question which was in this manner In the time of Henry the Eighth when Mr. Winby took upon him the style of Lord Talbois in right of his wife having no Issue by her The said King assisted both by Civil and Temporal Lawyers gave Sentence That no husband of a Baroness in her right should use that Style and Dignity until he had by her a Child whereby she should become Tenant by Courtesie unto her Inheritance The special Reasons that occasioned this Sentence were two First It should be convenient for her husband this day to be a Baron and a Peer of the Realm and to morrow by the death of his wife to become none and without the default of the party Secondly If he had Issue by wife and were entituled to be Tenant by the Courtesie of England of his wives Lands if he shall not also bear the Style and Dignity of his Wives Barony then should the Son after the death of his mother dying in the life time of his father be a Baron and Lord without Land for so the father should have the Land as Tenant by Courtesie and the Son the Lordship without Land And thus much said concerning the Nature Quality and Estate of a Baron by Writ and for the Resolution of the several points and Articles of the Question proposed may suffice CHAP. XII Barons by Patent which is the third kind of Barons mentioned in the former Division of Barons THere is also a fourth means of Creation viz. by Act of Parliament but the first two mentioned and this other by Patent is most usual for the Honour of the King for thereby the Donation doth proceed from his Majesty only as from the Fountain of Honour But when the Creation is by Parliament the King ever is one and may be said to be Donor A Baron therefore by Creation by reason of Letters Patents is that noble Person whom the King or any of his Progenitors Kings of this Realm have created Baron by such their Letters Patents began in the Reign of King Richard the Second This kind of Dignity of a Baron shall be of such continuance in Descent or otherwise as shall be limited in the Habendum in such Letters Patents contained for it may be but for the life of him to whom it is given or for term vanter vie as some hold Opinion in the 32 of Hen. 6. for cujus est dare est disponere It may be in special in our general Tayl and this kind of Tayl was usual before the Statute made decimo tertio of Edw. 1. by which Estate Tayl of Lands and Tenements was created as appeareth by the Patent whereby Hubert de Burgo was made Earl of Kent in the time of Henry the Third by these words Habendum sibi haeredibus suis de corpore Margaretae uxoris sui sorors Alexandri Regis Scotiae procreatis pro defectu talis exitus remanere in directis haeredibus dicti Huberti And that Estates intayl are at this Day of Titles of Honour by the said Statute of Westminster the second Question If a
Nobleman and his Progenitors have for a long time been called to Parliament and be a Baron either by Tenure or Writ and have had in regard thereof a place certain in Parliament if afterwards the said Nobleman should be created a Baron of that Barony and by the same name by Letters Patents whether shall he and his Heirs retain his old place in Parliament which he had according to his former Dignity or whether shall he lose his old place and take a new one according to the time of his Creation Answer The Case of the Lord Delaware lately erected a Resolution somewhat answerable to this Question Thomas Delaware in the third of Edward the Sixth being in some displeasure with William West his Heir and Nephew who was Father to Thomas late Lord Delaware and Grandfather to Henry Lord Delaware that Nevis procured by Act of Parliament by which the said William West was during his natural life only clearly disabled to claim demand or have any manner of Right Title or Interest by Descent Remainder or otherwise in or to the Mannors Lands Tenements or Hereditaments Title and Dignity of Thomas Lord Delaware his Uncle c. After the said Thomas Delaware died and the said William West was in the time of Queen Mary attainted of Treason by Verdict but pardoned by the said Queen and afterwards by Parliament in the time of Queen Elixabeth was restored and in the fourth year of her Reign was created Lord Delaware by Patent and took place in Parliament accordingly for that by the said Act of Parliament of Edward the Sixth he was excluded to challenge the former ancient Barony and after he died Now whether Thomas Delaware should take his place according to the ancient Barony by Writ or according to his Father's Creation by Patent was the Question The Opinions of the late Queens Council being his Majestie 's Attorney General and Solicitor were That the acceptance of the new Creation by the said William West could not extinguish the ancient Dignity for that he had not the ancient Dignity in him at that time of his Creation but the Dignity was by the Act of Parliament 3 Edw. 6. in the ballance of suspence or consideration of Law and he thereby utterly disabled to have the same during his life only so as other acceptance could not extinguish that Dignity which he then had not nor could not conclude his Heir who was not disabled by the Parliament 3 Edw. 6. to claim the ancient Barony which Opinion of theirs was seen and allowed by the then Chief Justice of England and Lord Chief Baron and so signified to the Lord Keeper But this to be noted by the Reasons made for the said Resolution though if the said Sir William West had been Baron and entituled and in possession of the ancient Dignity when he accepted the ancient Creation the Law perchance might have been otherwise but that remains as yet unresolved Nevertheless the Rule is Eodem modo quo quid constituitur dissolvitur But by a Grant which is but a matter of Fact a man cannot transfer his Title of Honour And thus much concerning the Degrees of Barons within this Realm upon this occasion for the better understanding and direction of that which followeth to be handled And in this place I think it not impertinent to mention one Case which I met with in our Books of Common Law concerning the Descent of a Title of Honour whereof the Ancestor had Estate in Feesimple there is a Maxim in the Law Possessio fratris in feodo facit sororemesse haeredem But if a man by any of the three means aforesaid be created into a Title of Dignity to him and his Heirs for ever and so have Issue by one wife a Son and a Daughter and hath also a Son by a second wife afterwards the Father dieth and his eldest Son entreth into all his Father's Inheritances and also enjoyeth the Titles and Dignities which his Father had but dieth without Issue In this Case the Dignity shall descend upon the younger Son though he be but of the half blood to him that last enjoyed that Name and Title of descent and shall not descend to his Sister of the whole blood And yet in this case he shall only be her Brother's Heir of all his Feesimple Lands and the reason thereof is because possessio fratris is the name and sole cause which may give Title to her his Sister which faileth in this case of Dignity for it cannot be said that her elder brother was in possession of his Title of Honour no more than of his blood so as neither by his own act nor any act to be done by any other did gain more actual possession if so it may be termed then by the Law did descend to him and therefore the younger brother may well by the Law make himself Heir unto his Father of the Honour that he cannot be heir unto his brother So that this word Possession which is no other than pedis positio extendeth only unto such things of which a man may by hâ—s entry or other act be possessed and doth require actual possession Coke's third part 92. Having thus much treated concerning the Creations and other things incident to the degrees of Nobility I cannot omit some things concerning the sufficiency and ability of Estate which the Law doth require to be in every of them according to their several Dignities The Common Law which always will decorum and conveniency be observed considering the Charges and Dignities appertaining to these Degrees and Dignities being Offices of principal Service to the King and Realm both in War and Peace hath ordered that each of them ought to have a convenient Portion and Inheritance in Land to support the said Dignity which Supplies are as Sinews conjoyned in the same For in Vertue and Riches as Aristotle confesseth all the old Nobility consisted and which two Properties maketh a good Complement for utilior est sapientia cum divitiis conjuncta Therefore a Knight's Fee which he ought to have is Twenty pounds Land by the year a Baron's thirteen Knights Fees and a quarter and an Earl's twenty Knights Fees For always the fourth part of each Revenues which is by the Law held requisite for the Dignity shall be paid to the King for the Relief As for Example the Relief of a Knight is five pounds which is the one fourth of his Revenue according to the Statute of the first of Edward the Second The Relief of a Baron is One hundred Marks which is also the fourth part of his Revenue And the Relief of an Earl is One hundred pounds alâ—o the fourth part of his Revenue And it appears by the Records of the Exchequer that the Relief of a Duke amounteth unto Three hundred pounds And this is the reason in our Books that every of the Nobility is presumed in the Law to have sufficient Freehold ad sustinendum nomen onus And to what value
There is none of the Nobility but have sufficient Freehold which the Plaintiffs may extend for their payment or satisfaction But a Capias or Exigit lieth against a Knight for the Law hath not that Opinion of his Freehold And if any of the Nobility happen to be so wilful and not to appear the Court will compel the Sheriff to return great Issues against him and so at every default to encrease the issues as lately against the Earl of Lincoln hath been in practice By the ancient Laws of this Realm before the coming of William the Conqueror many good Laws were made for keeping the Peace and amongst others That all above the age of twelve years should be sworn to the King which we in remembrance thereof do keep at this day in the view of Frank Pledge or the Court Leet But Noblemen of all sorts are neither bound to attend the Court Leet nor to take the Oath as appeareth by Britan. c. 29. treating of the Court called the Sheriffs Tourn out of which the Leet to be extracted And agreeable thereunto is the Statute of Marlbridge cap. 10. See the Lord Chancellor's Speech in the case of Postnati fol. 78. If a Writ of Error be brought in Parliament upon a Judgment given in the King's Bench the Lords of the higher House alone without the Commons are to examine the Errors ibid. fol. 22. In the 11 th of Henry the Fourth fol. 26. in a Case concerning a Distress taken for Expences and Fees the Knights of the Parliament are not contributary for such Lands as are parcel of their ancient Lordships and Baronies but for other Lands they are But there is a Question made If one which is no Baron but ignoble do purchase any ancient Barony whether he shall be discharged of such Expences and Fees or not Which is not worthy the questioning For as Land holden by Villainous Service doth not make him a Villain or Bondman which being free doth purchase the same although by his Tenure he shall be bound to do such Villainous Service So on the other side Land that is holden by Barony doth not make the Villain or Ignoble which purchaseth the same to be Noble although the charge of such Tenure do lye upon him in respect of the Service of the Realm It is said in our Books That a day of Grace or by the favour of the Court is not to be granted to the Plaintiff in any Suit or Action whereby a Nobleman is Defendant because thereby a Nobleman should be longer delayed than the ordinary course of the Court is and such a Lord is to have expedition of Justice in respect that he is to attend the person of the King and the Service of the Commonwealth But if there be no Noble person to the Suit the Judges do and may at their discretion upon a motion grant a day more of Grace otherwise than by the strict course of the Law the Plaintiff may challenge Cambden f. 169. writing upon this Subject saith Where a Nobleman is Demandant the Defendant may not be assoyned for the delay and cause aforesaid To which I could also subscribe but that the Book in the fifth of Hen. 4. 15. b. is otherwise adjudged There the King brought a Quare Impedit against a common person and the Defendant was essoyned by a Rule of Court If any Peer of the Realm be Plaintiff or Defendant in any Action real or personal a-against any other whereupon any Issue is to be tryed by a Jury the Sheriff must return one Knight at the least to be of the Inquest otherwise upon challenge made the whole pannel shall be quashed Which by order of the Law is appointed to be done for honour and reverence due to the person of that degree For when a Peer of the Realm is party it is otherwise than when the Suit is between private persons F. N. B. Title Challenge 115. 13. Edward the Third in a Quare Impedit against a Bishop adjudged But the Earl of Kent in the fourteenth year of the late Queen's Reign and the parties did plead to an Issue the Venire Facias is awarded which the Sheriff did return â—â—rved and a pannel returned accordingly in which is no Knight named The truth of which Case was that after the return made the Demand is published and demanded by the Queen and the Heralds to be Earl of Kent in right and discent although he had not been so reputed or named before and also after that time that is to say at the then last Parliament the Tenant is made a Baron by Writ of Parliament and then the Jury doth appear in the Court of Common Pleas and the Earl of Kent did challenge the Array because no Knight was returned but it was not allowed him by the Court for the admittance of both parties is to the contrary and no default can be laid to the Sheriff for he had no notice of the honourable Esâ—ate of either of the parties the Demandant not being then known or reputed to be an Earl by descent or of the Tenant then also being no Baron How much the Common Law hath always prohibited perpetuity in Lands and Tenements you may see in Corbet's Case in the first part of Coke's Book fol. 48. and in many other Cases in the rest of his Books As also Littleton fol. 145. saith it is a principle in the Law that every Land in Feesimple may be charged with a Rent But if the King's Majesty upon a Creation of any Peer of the Realm of what degree soever do as the manner is by Letters Patent give unto any such new created Nobleman an Annuity or Rent for the support of his degree which they call Creation-money this is so annexed to the dignity that by no Grant Assurance or any manner of Alienation it can be given from the Lord but is still incident and a support of the same Creation In all Cases wherein is any Suit a Baron or Peer of the Realm is to be amerced no less than five pounds but the amercement of a Duke is One hundred pounds Although the Statute of Magna Charta chap. 14. be in the Negative viz. Comites Barones non amercientur nisi per pares suos non nisi secundum modum delicti yet use hath reduced it into a certainty As also by the same Statute it appeareth that such Amercements should be assessed per pares suos but that it were troublesome to assemble Barons for so small a matter such Amercements in times past have been assessed by the Barons of the Exchequer who sometime were Barons of the Realm as is already taken notice of and so writeth Bracton lib. 3. tract cap. 1. fol. 116.8 Whereas by Statute 32 Hen. 8. cap. 16. it is enacted That the Subjects of this Realm shall not keep in their Houses or Families above the number of four Strangers born nevertheless by a Proviso in the same Act every Lord of the Parliament hath this
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
Honour deported themselves after the manner of Military Knights of those days To look further back ancient Histories do take notice of the Amazons of old whose Fame in Arms is sufficiently known Although Noble women may not sit in Parliament in respect of their Sex yet they are in Law Peers of the Realm and all or most of the prerogatives before mentioned which to the Noblemen are belonging do appertain unto them But the Opinion of some men have been That a Countess Baronness and other women of great Estate cannot maintain an Action upon the Statute de Scandalis magnatum because the Statute 2 Rich. 2. speaketh but of Prelates Dukes Earls Barons and of the Chancellor Treasurer Privy Seal Steward of the King's Houshold and other Nobles great Officers of the Realm by which words they conceive that the meanings of the Makers of that Statute was only to provide in that case for Noblemen and not for Noble women Also if any of the King's Servants within the Check-Roll do conspire the death of any Noble woman it is not Felony within the compass of the Statute 3 Hen. 7. 18. Honourable women as before noted are of three sorts by Creation by Descent and by Marriage And the King may create any woman into any Title of Honour at his pleasure and the King by his Letters Patents openly read in Parliament without any other Investure did create Mary Fane Widow the sole Daughter of Baron of Aburgaveny Baronness de le Spencer Noble women by Descent are either those to whom the Lands holden by such Dignity do descend as Heir and they are said to be Honourable by Tenure or by whose worthy Ancestors to whom they were Heirs was seized of an Estate descendable to them in their Titles of Dukedoms Earldoms or Baronies or those whose Ancestors were summoned to Parliament for hereby also Inheritance doth accrew to their Posterities Noble women are also those who do take to their Husbands any Lord or Peer of the Realm although they themselves were not of any degree of Nobility Question and doubt hath been made Whether if a man be summoned to Parliament and afterwards die without Issue Male the Dignity and Title of Honour may descend to the Heir Female And many Arguments have been pro contra in that case which at this time I purposely omit because I have before discoursed thereof in the Chapter of Barons Concerning the Title of Honour descendable to the Heir Female by reason of a Tenure of her Ancestors there needs no more doubt to be made than of Offices of Honour the which do much support the publick wealth and being of Estate of Inheritance do descend to the Heir Female if there be no nearer Heir Male As the Office of High Constableship of England challenged in the time of Henry the Eighth by the Duke of Buckingham and adjudged by the Advise and Resolution of the Judges as by a note of that Case extant whereof Dyer in his Reports hath a memorial 205. b. Kelway the Sixth of Henry the Eighth 170. b. which descended to the Daughter of Humphrey de Bohune Earl of Hereford and Essex as before is declared The Office of the Lord Steward descended to Blaunch Daughter of Henry Earl of Lancaster in whose right Iohn of Gaunt her Husband enjoyed the same The like may be said of the Office of Earl-Marshal which descended by an Heir Female unto the House of Norfolk All which Offices are as unfit to be exercised by a Woman as for a Woman of Honour to be summoned to the Parliament And when a Title of Honour doth descend to a Woman if question in Law do arise between the said Noble woman and any other person whether she be of that Degree of Nobleness or no the Issue shall be tried by the Record thereof and by the King 's Writ it shall be certified and not by a Jury of twelve Men even as it should have been in case her Ancestor had been party Although the Laws of the Realm regularly do make all the Daughters where there are no Sons equally to inherit Lands and Tenements and to be but one Heir to their Ancestor yet it is not so in the descent of Dignity and Titles of Honour for Inheritances concerning matter of Honour being things in their nature participating of Superiority and Eminency are not partable amongst many and therefore must of necessity descend unto one and that is to the eldest Daughter Sister Aunt or Cosin Female and inheritable where there is no Heirs Males that may lawfully challenge the same And so in this point is the Civil Law Nevertheless there was a Judgment in the time of Henry the Third touching the descent of the Earldom of Chester after the death of the Earl who died without Issue his Sisters being his Heirs which Judgment was That the said Earldom should be divided amongst the said Copartners as the other Lands and that the eldest should not have it alone But this Judgment was holden Erroneous even in those times wherein it was given For Bracton a Learned Judge who lived in that Age writeth thereof treating of partition between Copartners lib. 2. Case 24. by which it is evident That Baronies and Dignities of Honour do by the Laws of this Realm descend unto the eldest Copartner and the Judgment given once to the contrary thereof Bracton doth rightly account to be unjust His Reason is notable Forasmuch as the Honour of the Chivalry of this Realm doth chiefly consist in the Nobility Reason would not that such Dignity should be divided amongst Copartners whereby through multitude of partitions the reputation of Honour in such Succession and so divided might be impaired or the strenght of the Realm being drawn into many hands with decrease of livelyhood by such partition should be infeebled In which Resolution Britton the Learned Bishop of Hereford who compiled his Book of the Laws of this Realm by the Commandment and in the Name of Edward the First accordeth Britton 187. And therefore howsoever the Judgment was given or whensoever it is nevertheless very evident that it was soon redressed For if it were given upon the death of Ralph the last of that Name Earl of Chester who died about the Seventh of Henry the Third without Issue the Writers of that time do testifie that the Earldom of Chester came wholly unto Iohn Scott the Son of David Earl of Huntington and Auguish and Maud the eldest Sisters of the said Ralph if it were given upon the death of the said Iohn Scott who died about the Four and twentieth of Henry the Third without Issue yet notwithstanding the said Judgment stood in force for that the said King assumed the Earldom into his own Hands upon other satisfaction made to the said Sisters Copartners of the said Iohn Scottâ— Ne tanta haereditas inter colos deduceretur Matth. Paris Monaster Sancti Allane in Crompton fol. 366. b. Nevertheless you may read in this Treatise of
Heraldry written by Iohn Guillim about fol. 18. That Sisters are allowed no differences of Badges in their Coat-Armour by reason that by them the name of the House cannot be preserved but are admitted to the Inheritance equally and are adjudged but one Heir to all intents and purposes whatsoever And the knowledge of this point in these days is worthy to be enquired into for this is to be observed out of Presidents and to be acknowledged of every dutiful Subject that the King can advance to Honour whom he pleaseth And therefore whereas Radulph Cromwell being a Baron by Writ died without Issue having two Sisters and Coheirs Elizabeth the eldest married unto Sir Thomas Nevill Knight and Ioan the younger married to Sir Humphrey Bowcher who was called to Parliament as Lord Cromwell and not the said Sir Thomas Nevill who married the eldest Sister And Hugh Lupus the first and greatest Earl of Chester Habendum sibi haeredibus adeo libere per gladium sicut iple Rex tenuit Angliam per tenorem Hugh died without Issue and the Inheritance of his Earldom was divided amongst his four Sisters and the eldest had not the Seigniory entire unto herself If a Woman be Noble by Birth or Descent with whomsoever she doth marry although her Husband be under her Degree yet she doth remain Noble for Birth-right est Character indelebilis Other Women are enobled by Marriage and the Text saith thus viz. Women ennobled with the Honour of their Husbands and with the Kindred of their Husbands we worship them in the Court we decree matters to pass in the Names of their Husbands and into the House and Surname of their Husbands do we translate them But if afterwards a Woman do marry with a Man of a baser Degree then she loseth her former Dignity and followeth the condition of her latter Husband And concerning the second disparaged Marriage as aforesaid many other Books of the Law do agree for these be Rules conceived in those Cases Si mulier nobilis nupserit ignobili desinit esse nobilis eodem modo quo quid constituitur dissolvitur It was the Case of Ralph Howard Esq who took to Wife Anne the widow of the Lord Powes they brought an Action against the Duke of Suffolk by the Name of Ralph Howard Esq and the Lady Anne Powes his Wife and exception was taken for mis-naming of her because she ought to have been named of her Husband's Name and not otherwise and the Exception was by the Court allowed For said they by the Law of God she is Sub potestate viri and by our Law her Name of Dignity shall be changed according to the Degrees of her Husband notwithstanding the Courtesie of the Ladies of Honour and Court Dyer 79. And the like is also in Queen Maries Reign when the Dutchess of Suffolk took to her Husband Adrian Brook Title Brief 54. 6. And many other Presidents have been of later times And herewith agreeth the Civil Law Digest lib. 1. title q. lege 1. In this Case of acquired Nobility by marriage if question in Law be whereupon an Issue is taken between the Parties that is to say Dutchesses are not Dutchesses Countesses are not Countesses and Baronesses are not Baronesses the Trial whereof shall not be by Record as in the former Case but by a Jury of Twelve men and the reason of the diversity is because in this Case the Dignity is accrued unto her by her Marriage which the Lawyers term Matter in Fact and not by any Record But a Noble Woman by marriage though she take to her second Husband a man of mean Degree yet she may keep two Chaplains according to the Proviso in the Statute of 11. Hen. 8. Case 13. for and in respect of the Honour which once she had viz. at the time of the Retainer And every such Chaplain may purchase Licence and Dispensation c. And Chaplains may not be Non-residents afterwards And forasmuch as the retaining of Chaplains by Ladies of great Estate is ordinary and nevertheless some questions in Law have been concerning the true understanding of the said Statute Law I think it not impertinent to set down subsequent Resolutions of the Judges touching such matters So long as the Wife of a Duke is called Dutchess or of an Earl a Countess and have the fruition of the Honour appertaining to their Estate with kneeling tasting serving so long shall a Baron's Widow be saluted Lady as is also a Knight's Wife by the courtesie of England quamdiâ— matrimonium aut viduitas uxoris durant except she happen to clope with an Adulterer for as the Laws of this Kingdom do adjudge that a Woman shall lose her Dowry in that as unto Lands Tenements and Justice so doth the Laws of Gentry and Nobleness give Sentence against such a Woman advanced to Titles of Dignity by the Husband to be unworthy to enjoy the same when she putting her Husband out of her mind subjects her self unto another If a Lady which is married come through the Forest she shall not take any thing but a Dutchess Marchioness or Countess shall have advantage of the Statute de Charta Forest. 12 Artic. during the time that she is unmarried This is a Rule in the Civil Law Si filia Regis nubat alicui Duci vel Comiti ducetur tamen semper regalis As amongst Noble Women there is a difference of Degrees so according to their distinct Excellencies the Law doth give special priviledges as followeth By the Statute 25 Edw. 3. cap. 1. it is High Treason to compass or imagine the death of the Queen or to violate the King's Companion The King's Response is a sole person except by the Common Law and she may purchase in Feesimple or make Leases or Grants with the King she may plead and be impleaded which no other married Woman can do without her Husband All Acts of Parliament for any cause which any way may concern the Queen are such Statutes whereof the Judges ought to take Recognizances as of general Statutes though the matter doth only concern the capacity of the Queen yet it doth also concern all the Subjects of the Realm for every Subject hath interest in the King and none of his Subjects within his Laws are divided from the King who is Head and Sovereign so that his business concerns all the Realm and as the Realm hath interest in the King so and for the same Reason is the Queen being his Wife A man seized of divers Lands in Fee holden by Knight's Service some by Priority that is by ancient Feoffment holden of others and some other part holden of the King in posteriority the King granteth his Seigniory to the Queen during her life and afterwards the Tenant dieth his Son within Age in this case he shall have the Wardship of the Body and have the Prerogative even as the King himself should have had The Queen Consort or Dowager shall not be amerced if she be Nonsuited
again into the Hall where he shall sit at Table with the Knights and being risen and retired into his Chamber his Attire is taken off and again clothed with a blew Robe having on his left Shoulder a Lace of white Silk hanging to be worn upon all his Garments from that day forwards till he have gained some Honour and Renown for some Feats of Arms or some Prince or Lady of Quality cut that Lace from his Shoulder After Dinner the Knights must come to the Knight and conduct him into the King's presence to return him thanks for these Honours and so takes his leave of the King and the Governours craving his pardon for any miscarriage and claiming their Fees according to the Custom of the Court also take their leaves of the Knight I shall conclude this Chapter with giving an Account of the Knights made at the Coronation of his Majesty Knights of the Bath made at the Coronation of his Majesty King CHARLES the Second EDward Lord Clinton now Earl of Lincoln Iohn Egerton Viscount Brackley eldest Son to the Earl of Bridgwater Sir Philip Herbert then second Son to the Earl of Pembroke Sir William Egerton second Son to the Earl of Bridgwater Sir Vere Fane second Son to the Earl of Westmoreland Sir Charles Berkley eldest Son to George Lord Berkley Sir Henry Bellasis eldest Son to the Lord Bellasis Sir Henry Hyde now Earl of Clarendon Sir Rowland Bellasis Brother to Viscount Faulconberg Sir Henry Capell Sir Iohn Vaughan now eldest Son to the Earl of Carbery Sir Charles Stanley Grandchild to the late Earl of Derby Sir Francis Fane Sir Henry Fane Grandchildren to the Earl of Westmoreland Sir William Portman Baronet Sir Richard Temple Baronet Sir William Ducy Baronet Sir Thomas Trevor Baronet Sir Iohn Scudamore Baronet Sir William Gardiner Baronet Sir Charles Cornwallis afterwards Lord Cornwallis Sir Iohn Nicholas Sir Iohn Monson Sir Bourcher VVray Sir Iohn Coventry Sir Edward Hungerford Sir Iohn Knevett Sir Philip Boteler Sir Adrian Scroop Sir Richard Knightley Sir Henry Heron. Sir Iohn Lewkenor Sir George Brown Sir William Tyrringhum Sir Francis Godolphin Sir Edward Baynton Sir Greville Verney Sir Edward Harley Sir Edward VValpool Sir Francis Popham Sir Edward VVise. Sir Christopher Calthrop Sir Richard Edgcombe Sir William Bromley Sir Thomas Bridges Sir Thomas Fanshaw Sir Iohn Denham Sir Nicholas Bacon Sir Iames Altham Sir Thomas VVendy Sir Iohn Bramston Sir George Freeman Sir Nicholas Slaning Sir Richard Ingoldsby Sir Iohn Rolle Sir Edward Heath Sir William Morley Sir Iohn Bennet Sir Hugh Smith Sir Simon Leech Sir Henry Chester Sir Robert Atkyns now one of the Justices of the Common Pleas. Sir Robert Gayre Sir Richard Powle Sir Hugh Ducy Sir Stephen Hales Sir Ralph Bash. Sir Thomas VVhitmore OF Knights Batchelors With what is incident to that Degree of KNIGHTHOOD According to the Laws of England CHAP. XXI THE particular kinds of Services by which Lands of Inheritance are distinguished are two viz. Knights of Service and Knights of Soccage And in ancient time Tenure by Knights Service was called Regale servitiâ—m because it was done to and for the King and Realm and forinsecum servitium as appeareth in the 19 Edw. 2. Avowry 224. 26. Ass. p. 66. 7. Hen. 4. 19. Coke's seventh Part 8. a. Calvin's case because they who hold by Escuage ought to do and perform their Services out of the Realm Litt. 35. ideo forinsecum dici potest sit quia capitur foris hujusmodi servitia persolvuntur ratione Tenementorum non Personarum And as Knights-Service-Land requireth the service of the Tenant in Warfare and Battel abroad so Soccage-Tenure commandeth the attendance at the Plough the one by Manhood defending the King or his Lord's life and person the other by industry maintaining with Rents Corn and Victuals his Estate and Family For Kings did thus order their own Lands and Tenements one part they kept and detained in their own hands and in them stately Houses and Castles were erected and made for their habitations and defence of their Persons and of the Realm also Forests and Parks were there made for their Majesties Recreation One other part thereof was given to the Nobles and others of their Chivalry reserving Tenure by Knights Service The third part was bestowed upon men of meaner condition and quality with reservation of Soccage-Tenure And in this manner the Dukes and Nobles amongst their Menials and Followers dissipated a great part of their Lands viz. to their Gentlemen of quality to hold by Knights Service and to other of meaner condition by Soccage-Tenure The Right Honourable S. Ioseph Williams on of Milbeck hall in Cumberland Knight one of his Majestys principall Secretarys of State c a. The Honourable Sr. Robert Atkins of Totteridge in Hertford shire and of Sapperton in Glocester shire Knight of the Bath and one of his matys Iustices of the ComÌ„on pleas c a. Sr. Iohn Bennet of Dawly in Midd sx Kt. of the honble order of the Bath Leivtenant to his maties Band of Gentlemen Pentioners and eldest brother to the Rt. honble Henry Earle of Arlington who was first maried to Elizabeth Countess of Mulgrave daughter to the Earle of Midd sx and now to Bridget Howe of the Family of Sr. Grubham Howe Sr. Robert Southwell Knight one of the Clerkes attending his Majesty King Charles the Second in his most Honourable privy Councell câ—t Sr. Hugh Wyndham of Silton in Dorsetshire Kt. one of the Iustices of his matys Court of Comon pleas at Westminster eighth sonn of S. Iohn Wyndham of Orchard-Wyndham in Somersetshire Kt who was lineally descended from the antient Family of the Wyndhams of Felbrigg in Norfolk â—ownâ—r therâ—of Sr. Thomas Daniell of Beswick in the East Rideing of Yorkshire Kt. Major to his matys Regiment of Foot Guards and Captaine of his matys Archchiffe Fort in Dover Sr. Thomas Mompessonâ— antiently Montpintsonâ— of Bathampton in Wiltshire Knight a person of eminent Loyalty and suffering in the late trouble whose Family have been of greate antiquity in the said County Sr. Thomas Lynch of Great Sonkey in Lancashire Kt. one of the Gentlemen of his matyâ— privy Chamber in ordinary and late Governour of his Ma â—â—â— Island of Jamaica decended of the Lincâ—â—s of Groves in Kent and is now maried to Vere Herbert 2â— daughter of Sr. Edw Herbert sometyme Lord Keeper of the groâ—t seaâ—e Sr. William Pelham of Brocklesby in Lincolnshire Kt. whose Grandfatâ—er Sr. William Pelham of the said place Kt. who was descended of the antient family of the Pelhams of Langhtoniâ—â— sussex was employed under Queen Eliz in the offices of L d cheife Justice of Ireland Marshall of the English forces sentinto the Low Countrys Mastâ—â— of her ordnanceâ— and one of her privy Councell Sr Thomas Daviâ—s of the Citty of London Knight Ld. Maior thereof Anno 1677. Sr. William Prichard of the Citty of London Kt. and Alderman now maried to Sarah daughter of Francis
this Civil Dignity they have three Laws The first Ius agnitionis the right or law of descent for the kindred of the Father's side The second Ius Stirpis for the Family in general The third Ius Gentilitatis a law for the descent in Noble Families which Tully esteemed most excellent by which Law a Gentleman of Blood and Coat-Armour perfectly possessing Vertue was only priviledged To make that perfection in Blood a Lineal Descent from Atavus Proavus Avus and Pater on the Fathers side was required and as much on his Mothers line than he is not only a Gentleman of perfect Blood but of his Ancestors too The neglect of which Laws hath introduced other sorts of Gentleman viz. men that assume that Dignity but are neither so by Blood nor Coat-Armour which style only hurries them to an unruly pride which indeed is but rude and false honour termed by Sir Iohn Ferne Apocriphate and debarred of all priviledge of Gentility These Gentlemen nomine non re saith he are the Students of Law Grooms of his Majesties Palace Sons of Churls made Priests or Canons c. or such as have received Degrees in Schools or born Office in the City by which they are styled Gentlemen yet have they no right to Coat-Armour by reason thereof As to the Student of the Law Sir I. Ferne allows him the best aâ—â—urance of his title of Gentleman of all these irregular Gentlemen as he terms them because he is named in some Acts of Parliament yet he saith he is also debarred of all honour and priviledge by the Law of Arms. And anciently none were admitted into the Inns oâ— Court as before noted but such as were Gentlemâ—◠〈◊〉 Blood be their merits never so great â—or were the Church Dignities and Preferments bestowed indifferently amongst the Vulgar The Jews confined their Prieâ—â—hood to a Family but Ieroboam debased it in his Kingdom by preferring the basest of his people to the best of duties The Russians and some other Nations admit none to the study of the Law but Gentlemens younger Sons The decayed Families in France are supported and receive new life from the Court Camp Law and Ecclesiastical Preferments take the most solemn and serious who contemn the World if such are wanting to fill up their Vacancies the Ingeniouser sort of the Plebeans are admitted by which means their Church and State is in eâ—â—eem and reverence being filled most commonly with the best Blood and Noblest by Birth amongst them whereas with us every Clown that can spare but mony to bring up his Son â—or any of those Studies bereaves the Gentry of those Benefices and robs them of their support which grand abuse is the cause of the general Corruption in the State Civil and Ecclesiastick whereas were this preferment made peculiar to the Gentry they would stand more upon their Honour and live without being a Burthen to their Relations The Atchievement of a Gentleman hath no difference with that of an Esquire both their Helmets being close and sideways OF YEOMEN CHAP. XXVII THE Yeomen or Common People for so are they called of the Saxon word Zemen which signifies Common who have some Lands of their own to live upon For a Carn of Land or a Plough Land was in ancient time of the yearly value of five Nobles and this was the Living of a Stokeman or Yeoman And in our Law they are called Legalâ— homines a word familiar in Writs and Inquests And by divers Statutes it hath been enacted That none shall pass in any Inquest unless they had forty shillings Free-hold in yearly Revenue which maketh if the most value were taken to the proportion of moneys above Sixteen pounds of currant money at this present And by the Statute of 27 Eliz. ch 6. every Juror must have Forty pounds Lands In the end of the Statute made 23 Hen. 6. c. 15. concerning the Election of Knights for the Parliament it is ordered and expresly provided That no man shall be such Knight which standeth in the degree of a Yeoman It appeareth in Lambert's Perambulation of Kent 367. that this Saxon word Telphioneman was given to the Theyne or Gentleman because his life was valued at One thousand two hundred shillings and in those days the lives of all men were rated at certain sums of Money To the Churle or Yeoman because the price of his head was taxed at Two hundred shillings Which things if it were not expresly set forth in sundry old Laws yet extant might well enough be found in the Etymology of the words themselves the one called a Twelve hundred man and the other a Twyhind for a man of Two hundred And in this Estate they pleased themselves insomuch that a man might and also now may find sundry Yeomen though otherwise comparable for wealth with many of the Gentile sort that will not yet for that change their condition nor desire to be appareled with the title of Gentry By the Common Law it may appear in 1 Ed. 2. de Militibus and 7 Hen. 6. 15. a. men that had Lands to the value of Twenty pounds per annum were compellable at the King's pleasure to take upon them the Order of Knighthood and upon Summons there came a Yeoman who might expend a hundred Marks per annum and the Court was in doubt how they might put him off and at last he was waved because he came the second day By this sort of men the trial of Causes in the Country proceedeth ordinarily for of them there are greater number in England than in any other place and they also of a more plentiful livelyhood and therefore it cometh to pass that men of this Country are more apt and fit to discern in doubtful Cases and Causes of great examination and trial than are men wholly given to moil in the ground to whom that Rural exercise engendreth rudeness of wit and mind And many Franklins and Yeomen there are so near adjoyning as you may make a Jury without difficulty for there be many of them that are able to expend One or two hundred pounds per Annum As in the ancient time the Senators of Rome were elected a Censu and as with us in conferring of Nobility respect is had to their Revenues by which their Dignity and Nobility may be supported and maintained So the Wisdom of this Realm hath of ancient time provided that none shall pass upon Juries for the trial of any matter real or personal or upon any criminal cause but such as besides their Moveables have Lands for estate of life at the least to a competent value lest for need or poverty such Jurors might easily be corrupted or suborned And in all Cases and Causes the Law hath conceived a better Opinion of those that have Lands and Tenements or otherwise are of worth in moveable Goods that such will commit or omit nothing that may any way be prejudicial to their estimation or which may endanger their Estates than it hath of