of dignity and the Entry of Capias alias plures was according to the said originall but in the Exigent and Proclamation and in the Entry of it the Defendant was named according to his degree of Dignity upon a Writ of Errour after judgment doubt was if this might be amended in another Court then where the originall was made and at last it was resolved by all the Court that the Record should be amended by the Cursitor and made according to the Note or Title delivered unto him by the Plaintiffes Attorney Cook 8. part fol. 15. b. It appeareth in our Book of Law that the highest and lowest Dignity are uniuersall For as if a King of a Forreign Nation come into England by leave of the King of this Realm as it ought to be in this case he shall sue and be sued in the name of a King 11. Ed. 3. Test Breccon 473. So shall he sue or be sued by the Name of a Knight whersoever he received that degree of Dignity 20. Ed. 4. 6. H. 6. 14. but otherwise it is as if a Duke Marquesse Earl or other Title of Honour given by any Forreign King yea though the King by Letters Pattents of safe conduct do name him Duke or by any other his forreign Title of Dignity For experience sheweth that Kings joyned in league together by a certain mutuall anâ— as it were a Naturall power of Monarchs according to the Law of Nations have denized one anothers subjects and Ambassadors graced with this title of Honour Therefore though a Knight receive his Dignitie of a Forraigne Prince he is so to be stiled in all Legall proceedings within England Vide Cooke 7. part fol. 16. b. And Kings were wont to send their sonnes to their Neighbour Princes to receive Knighthood at their hands Vide Selden fol. 331. 308. thinking that it was more honourable to take Armes of some other lest affection might seeme to prevent judgement when the father gave them that honour Thus was our King H. 2. sent unto David King of Scots and Malcombe also king there sent unto our H. 2. and our king to the king of Castile to take of them Military or Civill Armes for the tearmes and phrases they used in that age for the making of a knight Vide Camden 174. 8. vide Selden fol. 315. And knights in all forraigne Countries have ever place and precedencie according as they are ancient knights which priviledge is deemed to Noblemen for be they never so ancient in forraigce Countries they shall goe before as Puesneys The degree of knighthood is not onely a Dignitie and honour to the party for so it is termed in Brooke title Additions fol. 44. but honourable for the kingdome and therefore it hath been an ancient Prerogative of the kings of this Realm at their pleasure to compell men of worth to take upon them this degree upon the payment of a Fine as appeareth in Ann. 7. H. 6. 15. Fitzh Abridg. tit Im. 12. and by the Statute a. 1. Ed. 2. de militibus But we see by experience in these daies that none are compelled thereunto and that is the reason wherefore if the Plaintiffe be made knight hanging the Writ it shall abate because hâ— hath changed his name and that by his owne act Vide Cooke 7. part f. 27. b. part 10. b. 1 Ed. 6. cap. 7. contrary And for that cause also by the common Law not only the king but every Lord of a Manor ought to have of every of his tenants a reasonable fine to make his eldest son knight Vide Bracton fol. 36. b. and all lands are subject to these aides except onely ancient Demeasnes and grand and petty serjeantly tenures as the Law hath been anciently delivered Vide Fiszh Nat. bre f. 83. a. and Selden f. 13. where it is also said one that wrote a little after the statute of West the first allowes as a good barre to the avowry for the tenant to plead that the father himself is no knight so that one not knighted cannot claime the aide of his own Tenants Briton de Prises de Avers And it was not at the liberty of the Lord to make more or lesse of his Tenants by the common Law in this case but by the statute at Westminster 1. cap. 35. it is put into certainty viz. forasmuch as before this time reasonable and to make one son knight or to marry his daughter was never put into certainty nor how much should be taken at that time whereby some levyed unreasonable aide and more often then seemed necessary whereby the people were sore grieved And it is therefore provided that from henceforth a whole knights fee be taken but 20. s. and of more more and of lesse lesse after that rate and that none shall levie such aide to make his son knight untill the sonne be 15. yeares of age nor to marry his daughter untill she be of the age of 7. yeares and of that there shall be mention made in the kings Writs formed on the same if any one will demand it and if it happen that the Father after he had leavied any such aid of his Tenants did before he hath marryed his Daughter the Executors of the Father shall be bound to the daughter for so much as the Father received for the Aid And if the Fathers goods be not sufficient his heir shall be charged therwith unto the daughter and this Heir is so incident that although the Lord do confirm unto the Tenant to hold by fealty and certain Rent and release unto him all other services and demands yet he shall have the aid to make his eldest Son Knight Anno 40. E. 3. f. 22. Finches book 24. but the King was not bound by the statute beforementioned because the King was not named in that statute and therfore by the statute 25. E. 3. cap. 11. The Kings aids were brought to a like value Selden fol. 3. 30. The intention of the Law is that an heir within the age of 21. years is not able to do Knight-service till his full age of 21. years Littleton lib. 2. cap. 4. f. 22. But such a presumption of Law doth give place to a judgment and proof to the contrary as Bracton saith Sabilitur presumptioni donec probetur in contrarium And therfore the King who is the Sovereign and Supream Judge of Chivalry hath dubbed him Knight he by this hath judged him able to do him Knight-service and all men concluded not to say to the contrary therfore such an heir being made Knight either in the life of his Father or afterwards during his minority shall be out of ward and custody both for Lands and for his body or marriage by the ancient common Law by reason also that the Honour of Knight-hood is so great that it is not to be holden under by any yet if the King do create any such an Heir within Age a Duke or Marquesse Earl Count Viscount or Baron by this
apparant of the King of England and of such a King who is heir unto the said Prince Edward And such a first begotten son and heir apparant to the Crown shall inherit the said Dukedom in the life of the said King his father with manner of limitation of estate was short excellent and curious varying from the ordinary Rules of the Common Law touching the framing of any estate of inheritance in fee-simple or fee-tail And neverthelesse by the authority of Parliament a speciall fee-simple iâ— in that onely case made as by judgment may appear in the Book aforesaid and the case thereof fol. 27. and 21 E. 3. 41. b. And ever since that creation the said Dukedom of Cornwall hath been the peculiar inheritance of the Kings eldest son ad supportandum nomen onus bonoris to support the name and weight of that his honourable estate during the king his fathers life so that he is ever Duxnatus non creatus a Duke born not created and the said Duke the very first day of his nativity is presumed and taken to be of full and perfect age so that he may sue that day for his livery of the said Dukedom and ought of right to obtain the same as well as if he had been full 21 yeers of age And the said Black-Prince was the first Duke in England after the Conquest for though Bracton who made his Book in H. 3. saith Et sunt sub regâ—duces as before appeareth yet that place is to be understood of the ancient kings who were before the conquest for in Mag. Charta which was made in Anno 9 H. 3. we finde not the name of Duke amongst the Peers and Nobles there mentioned For seeing the Norman Kings themselves were Dukes of Normandy for a great while they adorned none with this honour of Duke And the eldest son of every King after this creation was Duke of Cornwall and so allowed As for example Henry of Munmouth eldest son of H. 4. and Henry of Winsoâ— eldest son of H. 5. and Edw. of Westminster the first son of Ed. 4. and Arthur of Winchester first son of H. 7. and Edward of Hampton first son of H. 8. but Richard of Burdeaux who was the first son of the Black-Prince was not Duke of Cornwall by force of the said creation for albeit after the death of his father he was heir apparant to the Crown yet because he was not the first begotten son of a King of England for his father dyed in the life time of king Ed. 3. the said Richard was not within the limitation of the grant and creation by authority of Parliament made in the 11 yeer of king Edward above mentioned And therefore to supply that defect in the 5. yeer of Ed. 3. he was created Duke of Cornwall by a speciall Charter Elizabeth eldest daughter to king Edw. 4. was not Dutches of Cornwal for she was the first begotten daughter of king Edw. 4. but the limitation is to the first begotten son Henry the 8. was not in the life of his father king H. 7. after the death of his eldest Brother Arthur Duke of Cornwall by force of the said creation for albeit he was sole heir apparant to the king yet he was not his eldest begotten son Cooks 8 part 29. b. and 30. a. And the opinion of Stamford a learned Judge hath been that he shall have within his Dukedom of Cornwall the kings Prerogatives because it is not severed from the Crown after the form as it is given for none shall be inheritour thereof but the kings of the Realm For example whereas by the Common Law if a man hold divers Mannors or other lands and toâ—ements of severall Lords all by knights service some part by priority and ancient Feoffment and other lands by posterity and by a latter Feoffment and the Tenant so seized dyeth his son and heir within age In this case the custody of Wardship of the body and his marriage may not be divided among all the Lords but one of them onely shall have right unto it because the body of a man is intire and the Law doth say That the Lord of whom some part of those lands be holden by priority and by the same tenure of Chivalry shall have it except the king be any of the Lords for them though the Tenant did purchase that land last yet after his death the king shall bee preâ—erred before all or any other the Lords of whom the Tenant did hold by priority And so shall the Duke of Cornwall in the same case have the same Prerogative if his Tenant dye holding of him but by posterity of Feoffment for any tenure of his Dutchie of Cornwall although the said 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 before is said Iohn of Gaunt the fourth son of king Edward 3. did take to wife Blanch who was daughter and heir to Henry Duke of Lancaster who had issue Henry afterwards king of England so that the said Dutchy of Lancaster did come unto the said Henry by discent from the part of his mother and being a subject he was to observe the Common Law of the Land in all things concerning his Dutchie For if he would depart in Fee with any part thereof hee must make livery and seizen or if hee had made a Lease for life reserving rent with a reentery for default of payment and the rent happen to be behind the Duke might not enter unlesse hee doe make a demand or if he had aliened any part thereof whilest he was with age hee might defeat the purchaser for that cause and if hee would grant a reversion of any estate for life or yeares in being there must also be Attornment or else the grant doth not take effect But after that hee had deposed King Richard the second and had assumed upon him the Royall estate and so had conjoyned his naturall bodie in the bodie Politique of the King of this Realme and so was become King Then the possessions of the Duchie of Lancaster were in him as King and not as Duke For the name of Duke being not so great as the name of a King was drowned by the name of King and by the State Royall in him who was Duke for the King cannot bee a Duke within his owne Realme but out of his Realme hee may And likewise the name of the Duchie and all the Franchizes Liberties and Jurisdictions of the same when they were in the hands of him who had the Crowne and Jurisdiction Royall were gone by thâ— Common Law and extinct for the greater doth distinguish the lesse and after those times the possessions of the Dutchie of LANCASTER would not passe from King Henry the fourth but by his Letters Patents under the great Seal of England without livery of seifin and without Attornment and if he make a Lease for life being Duke
King of England as also to our selfe by our Letters 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 Thomes Beauchamp brother to the foresaid Guy and to his heires males of his body issuing c. And afterwards the said Gâ—y 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 Beauchamp de 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 of the which the said Thomas died seised in Fee simple was 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 Jane Lady of Abergany Married to Lewthall 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 De la ware 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 De la ware 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 De la ware Knight although Iohn Griffith was heire generall of the aforesaid Thomas De la ware being of the whole blood as appeareth by the genealogie ensuing Iohn Lord Delaware son of Roger. Iohn Lord Delaware Roger Lord Delaware Elisabeth daughter to Adam L. Wels. Iohn Lord De la ware died without issue Thomas Lord Dela ware died without issue Elisabeth daughter to the Lord Mowbray hâ—s second wife Iohn Griffin heire generall to the Lord Delaware Sir Reignold West Lord De la ware 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 deed 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 Ursula married to Edm. Knightley Esq Dorothy married to Nevill Sir Robert de Vere
is no heire male at all that may claime the same for then doth this question take place whether the husband of such heire female shall enioy the dignitie in the right of his wife or no wherein wee are to rest upon a resolution had and given in this speciall question which was in this manner In the time of Hen. 8. when Mr. Winbie tooke upon him the stile of Lord Talboys in the right of his wife having none issue by her the said King assisted both by Civill and Temporall Lawyers gave sentence that no husband of Baronesse in her right should use the stile and dignitie untill he had by her a Child whereby he should become Tenant by the courtesie unto her inheritance The speciall reasons that occasioned this sentence were two First it should be inconvenient for her husband this day to bee a Baron and Peere of the Realme and to morrow by the death of his wife to become none and that without the death of the partie Secondly if he had issue by his wife and were intituled to be Tenant by the curtesie of England of the wives land if hee shall not also beare the stile and dignitie of her Barony then should his sonne after the death of his mother dying in the life time of his father bee Baron and Lord without land for so the Father should have the land as Tenant by the curtesie and the sonne the Lordship without Land And thus much said concerning the nature quality and estate of a Baron by writ and for resolution of the severall points and Articles of the question proposed may suffice Barons by Patent which is the third kind of Barons mentioned in the former division of Barons THere is also a fourth meanes of creation by act of Parliament but the first 2. mentiond and this by Patent are most for the honour of the King for thereby the donation doth proceed from his highnes onely as from the fountaine of all honour and dignity but when the creation is by Parliament every one may bee said donator Cookes 8. part 19. A Baron by creation by reason of Letters Patents is that Noble person whom the Kings Maiesty or any of his progenitors Kings of the Realme have created Barons by such their Letters Patents But this manner of creating Barons by Patent began in the Raign of R. 2. who created first Iohn Beauchamp of Holt Baron of Kidderminster by his Letters Patents 8. October anno 11. But Mils saith in 30. H. 6. this was brought in This kind of dignity of Baron shall bee of such countenance in discent or otherwise as shall beelimited in the Habendi in such Letters Patents contained for it may be but for the life of him to whom it is given or for terme de anter vie of some other mans life as some hold opinion in 9. H. 6. 29. for Cujus est dare eius est dispoâ—ere it may be in speciall a generall tayle and this kind of estate tayle was usuall before the Statute made 13. E. 1. by which estate tayle in Lands and Tenements was created as appeareth by the Patent whereby Hubert de Burgo was made Earle of Kent in the time of H. 3. by these words Habend sibi hered suis de corpore Maâ—gaâ—etaeuxoris suâ— sororis Alexandri Regis Scotiâ— procreatis pro defectu talis exitus remaâ—ere rectis heredâ—bus dicti Huberti and that estates in tayle are at this day titles of honour by the Statute of Westm 2. vide Nevils case Cooks 7. part 33. For the better explanation of this kind of dignity the resolution also of certaine questions shall be very requisite Question If a Nobleman and his Progenitors have for a long time been called to the Parliament and be a Baron either by tenure or writ have had in regard thereof a place certaine in Parliament if afterwards the same Nobleman should be created a Baron of that Barony and by the same name by Letters Patents whether shall hee and his heires retaine his old place in Parliament which hee had according to the former dignity or whether shall he lose â—is old place and take a new place according to the time of his creation onely Answer The case of the Lord Delaware received a resolution Coo 11. part â—â—e Lord de la wares case somewhat answerable to this question Tho. Lord Delaware 3. â— 6. being in some displeasure with William West his Nephew and heire who was Father to the now Lord De la ware procured an Act of Paâ—liament by the which the said Wâ—ll West was during his naturall life only clearly disabled to clayme demand or have any manner of right title or interest by discent â—evenue or otherwise in or to the mannor lands tenements or hereditaments title and dignity of Thomas Lord De la wâ—re his Vncle Afâ—er the said Thomas De la ware dyed and the said VVilliam West was in the time of the late Queene Elizabeth restored and afterwards in the 8. yeare of her Raigne was â—teated Lord De la ware by Patent and had place in Parliament according to his creation by Patent for that by the said Act of Parliament in the time of E. 6. hee was excluded to challenge the former ancient Baâ—ony and after hee dyed whether the new Lord Dela ware should take his place to the ancient Barony by writ or according to his Fathers creation by Patent was the question the opinion of the late Queenes Counsell being Her Majesties Atturney Generall and Solicitor were that the acceptance of the new creation by the said William West could not distinguish the ancient dignity in him at the time of his creation but the dignity was at that time by the Act of Parlâ—ament 3. E. 6. in obeyance suspence or consideration of Law and hee thereby utterly disabled to have the same during his life only so as other acceptance could not extinguish that dignity which hee then had not nor could not conclude his hâ—ire who was not disabled by the said Act of 3. E. 6. to clayme the ancient Barony which opinion of theirs was seene and allowed by the resolution of the chiefe Iustice of England and Lord chiefe Baron and so signified unto the Lord Keeper but this is to bee noted by the reasons made for the said resolution that if the said William West had beene Baron and intituled or in possession of the ancient dignity when hee accepted the said creation the Law perchance might have been otherwise but that remayneth as yet unresolved neverthelesse the rule eodem mod quo quid constuitur dissolvitur but by grant which is made a matter in fact a man cannot transferre his title of honour Cook 7. part And thus much concerning the three degrees of Barons within this Realme may suffice to be said in geneâ—all upon this occasion for the better understanding and direction of that which followeth to be handled And in this place I thinke it not impertinent
Noble person for it appertaineth not to them to argue or dispute the Authority of the Court but if the Court â—e thereof certified in forme aforesaid they will award a Supersedeas which is in the Booke of Enteries in the Title of Errour Sect. 20. and there are two reasons or causes wherefore no Capias or Exigent lyeth against any Peere the one because of the dignity of their persons the other by Intendment of Law there is none of the Nobility but have sufficient Freehold which the Plâ—intiffe may extend for their payment or satisfaction but a Capias oâ— Exigent lyeth against a Knight for the Law hath not that opinion of his Freehold as the Court said in 26. H. 8. vide 27. H. 8. 22. in Brookes abridgement Exigent 2. 3. Cooko 6. part 52. 54. And if any of the Nobility happen to be so wilfull as not to appeare the Court will compell the Sheriffe to returne great issues against him and so at every default to increase and multiply the issâ—es as lately against the Earle of Lincolne hath been in practice By the Ancient Lawes of this Realme before the comming of William the Conquerour many good Lawes were made for the keeping of the peace amongst others that every man above the Age of 12. yeares should bâ— swâ—rne to the King as you may read more at large iâ— Lamberts perambulation of Kent 21. which we in remembrance thereof doe keep at this day in view of Frank pledge or leete Court but Noblemen of all sorts are neither bound to attend the Leete nor to take that Oath as appeares by Britton cap. 29. treating of this Court called the Sheriffes Turne Courts of which the Leete seemes to be extracted and agreeable thereunto is the Statute of Marlbridge cap. 10. in these words de turnis vice contra provisum est quod necesse non habeant ubi venire Archiepiscopi Episcopi Abbates Priores Committes Barones vide the Lord Chancellors Speech in the case of Post-nati fol. 78. If a Writ of Error be brought in Parliament upon a Judgement given in the Kings Bench the Lords of the higher House alone without the Commons are to examine the errors vide Jbid. fol. 22. Jn 11. H. 4. 2. b. In a case concerning a distresse taken for expences and Fees of the Knights of the Parliament it is agreed for Law that the Baronies and other Lands as are parcell of their ancient Lordships and Baronies but for other Lands they are But there is a question made one which is no Barron but ignoble doe purchase any ancient Barony whether he shall be discharged of such ignoble purchase by reason onely of such his purchase challenge or pretence to have Nobility and place in Parliament as before in this treatise more at large appeareth for as Lands by Villany service doe not make a Villany or Bondman which being free doth purchase the same as Littleton doth teach lib. 2. cap. 12 though by his Tenure he shall be bound to doe such Villanie service so of the other side and that is holden by Barony doth not make the villany peasent or ignoble which purchaseth the same to be noble although the charge of such tenure doe lye upon him in respect of the service of the Realme It is said in our Bookes that a day of grace or by the favour of the Court is not to bee granted to the Plaintiffes in any Suite or Action wherein a Nobleman is defendant 27. H. 8. 22. 27. E. 3. 88. because thereby the Nobleman should be longer delayed then the Ordinaty course of the Court is and such Lord is to have expedition of Iustice in respect that he is to attend the Person of the King and the Service of the Common-wealth but if there be no ignoble person party to the Suite the Judges doe and may at their discretions grant upon a motion and prayer a day or more of tryall otherwise then by the strict course of the Law the Plaintisse may challenge Cambden fol. 169. writing upon the Subâ—ect saith where the Noble man is demandant the Tenant may not be essoyned for the delay and causes aforesaid to which â— would also subscribe but that the Booke of 3. H. 4 5 6. is otherwise adjudged if I doe misunderstand it there the King brought a Oâ—â—re Impedit against a Common person and the defendant was essoyned by the rule of the Court Therefore a fortiori he might be essoyned against a Nobleman Jf any Peere of the Realme being a Lord of the parliamant be plaintiffe or demandant defendant or Tenant in any Action reall or personall against another whereupon an issue is to be tryed by a Jury the Sheriffe must returne one Knight at the least to be of the Inquest otherwise upon a challenge made the whole Pannell shall be quashed which by the order of the Law is appoynted to be done for Honour and reverence due to the persons of that degree for as the words of the Booke are when a Peere of the Realme is party the Law is otherwise then when the Suite is betweene other persons Fitz. Chall 113. 13. E. â— in a Quar. Impedit against a Bishop adjudged Plowd 117. Dyer 208. b. 27. H 8. 22. b. But the Earle of Kent by the name of Reignald Gray Esq brought a Writ of Entry against Sir H. G. Knight 4. Eliz. and the parties did plead to an issue the venire facias was awarded which the Sheriffe did returne ferved and a Pannell returned according in which pannell there is no Knight named the truth of which Cause was that after the returne made the demandant is published and declared by the Queene and the Heraulds to be Earle of Kent in right and by discent although hee had not beene so reputed or named Earle before and also after that time that is to say at the then last parliament the Tenant is made a Baron by a Writ of parliament and both parties have places and voyces in parliament and then the Iury doe appeare in the Court of Common pleas and the Earle of Kâ—nt did challenge the array because no Knight was returned but it was not allowed him by the Court for the admittance of both parties as to the contrary and no default can bee layd to the Sheriffe for he had no notice of the honourable estates of either of the parties the demandant not being then knowne or reputed to bee an Earle by discent or of the Tenants then also being no Baâ—on Dyer 318. How much the Common Law hath alwaies prohibited perpetuities in Lands and Tenements you may see in Corbets Case in the first part of Sir Edward Cookes Booke Fol. 84. and in many other Cases in the rest of his Books also Littleton Fol. 145. saith it is a Principle in the Law that every Land of Fee-simple may be charged with a Rent in Fee-simple by one way or other but of the Kings Majesty upon the Creation of any Peere of the Realme Duke
Land-lord and that by the space of two yeares whereupon he doth bring a writ of Cessavit which is his remedy given him by the Law thereby to recover the inheritance of the land but the said Lord 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 licence 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 Essoinee and so is the use at this day The Statute of magna charta cap. 1â— is quod liber homo non amercietur pro parvo delicto nisi secundum modum illius delicti pro magno delicto secundum magnitudinem delicti nulla praedictarum misericordiarum 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 or for his marriage though he be within age Cooks 6. part 74. in Druries case Nobility and Lords in reputation onely THere are other Lords in reputation and appellation who neverthelesse are not de jure neither can they enjoy the priviledge of those of the Nobility that are Lords of the Parliament The sonne and heire of a Duke during his fathers life is onely by curtesie of speech and honour called an Earle and the eldest sonne of an Earle a Baron but not so in legall proceedings or in the Kings Courts of Iustice Brook Treason 2. But the King may at his pleasure create them in the life of their Ancestors into any degree of Lords of the Parliament Cook 8. part 16. b. A Duke or other of the Nobilitie of a forraigne Nation doth come into this Realme by the Kings safe conduct in which the Kings said Letters of Conduct he is named Duke according to his Creation yet that appellation maketh him not a Duke c. to sue or to be sued by that name within England but is onely so reputed But if the King of Denmark or other Soveraigne King come into England under safe conduct he during his aboad in England ought to bee stiled by the name of King though hee have not merum imperium out of his owne Kingdome yet he shall retaine honoris titulos Cook 7. part 15. b. sequentia All the younger sonnes of the Kings of England are of the Nobility of England and Earles by their birth without any other Creation and onely Lords in reputation And if an English man be created Earle of the Empire or of other title of honour by the Emperour he shall not beare the title in England and therefore is an Earle onely in reputation A Lord of Ireland and Scotland though he be a Postnatus is not a Lord in England in legall Courts of Iustice though he be commonly called and reputed a Lord. NOBLE VVOMEN ALthough Noble women may not sit in Parliament in respect of their sexe yet they are in the law Peeres of the Realm and all or most of the Prerogatives before mentioned which to Noblemen are belonging doe also appertaine to them Cook 8. part 53. But the opinion of some men hath been that a Countesse Baronesse or other woman of great estate cannot maintaine an action upon the statute de scandalis Magnatum because the statute of 2. R. 2. cap. 5. speaketh but of Prelates Dukes Earles Barons or other Nobles and other great men of the Realme and of the Chancellour Treasurer Clarke of the Privie Seale Steward of the Kings house Iustice of the one Bench or of the other great officers of the Realm by which words they conceive the meaning of the makers of that statute was onely to provide in that case for Lords and not for women of honour Crompton Justice of Peace 45. b. Also if any of the Kings servants within his Check-roll doe conspire the death of any Noble man it is not felony within the compasse of the statute 3. H. 7. cap. 13. Honourable women are of three sorts By creation by Descent or by Marriage King Henry the eighth created Anne Bullen Marchionesse of Pembrook and so may the King create any woman into any title of honour as to his Highnesse shall seem good As the King by by his Letters Patents openly read in the Parliament did create Widow the sole daughter of late Baron of Abergavenny Baronesse De le Spencer Cambden 63. 6. Noble women by descent are those to whom either the lands holden by such dignity do descend as heir and they are said to be honourable by tenure or those whose Ancestors to whom they are heires were seised of an estate descendable unto them in their titles of Dukedomes Earldomes or Baronies or those whose Ancestors were summoned to the Kings Parliament for thereby also an inheritance doth accrue to their posterities Noble women also are those who do take to their husbands any Lord or Peere of the Realme although they of themselves were not of any degree of Nobility Fortescue de laudibus legum Angliae fol. 100. Question and doubt hath been made whether if a man be summoned to the Parliament and afterwards die without issue male the dignity and title of honour may descend to the heire female and many arguments have beene made pro contra in that which at this time â— doe purposely omit because I have before discoursed thereof in the title of Barons in this Treatise Concerning the title of honour descendable to the heire female by reason of a tenure in her Ancestor there need no more doubt to be made than of offices of honour the which doe much import the publike wealth and being of estate of inheritance doe descend to the heire female if there be no heire male as the office of high-Constableship of England challenged in the time of H. 8. by the Duke of Buckingham and judged by the advice and resolution of the Judges as by a note of that case extant whereof my Lord Dyer in his Reports hath a memoriall is most evident Dyer 283. b. Kellaway 6. H. 8. 170. b. which descended to the daughters of Humphrey de Bohun Earle of Hereford and Essex as afore is declared the office of a Lord Steward descended to Blanch daughter of Henry Earle of Lancaster in whose right John of Gaunt her husband enjoyed the same The like may be said of the office of Earle Marshall which descended by an heire female unto the house of Norfolk all which offices are as unfit to be exercised by a woman as it is unfit for a woman to be summoned to the Parliament as Baronesse by writ as before is written And when the title of honour doth descend to a woman if question in Law doe arise betweene the noble woman and any other person whether she be of that degree of noblenesse or no the issue shall be tried by the Record thereof and by the Kings writ it shall be certified and not by a Jury of twelve men even as it should be in case her Ancestors had beene party Cooks 6. part 53. 7. part 15. Although the Lawes of this Realme regularly doe make all the daughters where there are no sonnes equally to inherit Lands and Tenements and to be but one heire to their Ancestor yet it is not so in the descent of dignities and titles of honour for inheritances concerning matters of honour being things in their nature entire paticipating 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 inheritable where there is no heires males that may lawfully challenge the same and so in
answere to be made to these objections being of all others the most materiall and of moment used in this behalf it shall be convenient for the more easie unfolding the state of this question to exhibite certain necessary and requisite propositions and upon them to draw true and infallible conclusions and then to prove them by authority of Law consent and time and manifold presidents which done the answere will be easily made as I conceive to every of the foresaid objections First therefore if a Baron by tenure which holdeth any Castle Honour or Mannour per Baroniam do alien or give the same either he doth it without any licence obtained from his Majesty so to do or else by some certain licence in that behalf obtained If he doe it without licence then the conclusion is certain by the lawes of this Realme the Barony Castle Honour and Mannour so aliened without licence or consent is forfeited and the same Honour Castle or Mannour so holden by Barony and so aliened is to be seised into the Kings hands for the said forfeiture and such dignity and estate no longer to be borne and continue but to be resumed and extinguished in the Crowne from whence it was derived Read hereof in Stamfords Prerogative cap. 7. But nota in Cook 2. part 80. b. The reason thereof is notable if we call to remembrance that which was formerly alledged out of Bracton That Baronies are the strength of the Realme and suffer no division they suffer also no alienation without the consent or licence of the soveraign Monarch for so should the Realme be enfeebled and base persons enabled without desert of vertue or prowesse For where the thing so aliened is an Honour or head of the Barony it differs much from the ordinary tenure in capite whereof if the Tenant make alienation without licence hee is onely to pay fine by the statute 1. E. 3. cap. 12. whereof also before the making of the statute there was diversity of opinion at the Common Law after the statute of Magna Charta But let me cite some authorities for the proofe of these allegations Glanvile the most ancient Writer of the Lawes of this Realme now extant hath these words Notandum autem quòd nec Episcopus nec Abbas quia eorum Baroniae sunt de eleemosyna Regis Antecessoris ejus non possunt de Dominicis suis aliquam partem dare ad remanentiam sine assensu confirmatione Domini Regis lib. 7. cap. 1. in fine statut Westm. cap. 42. In Edward the thirds time certaine land being parcell of the Barony of Brember was aliened by William de Bruse the Baron thereof without licence of the King and in the argument of a cause concerning the same Greene one of the Judges delivereth this for law That parcell of a Barony or Earldome held of the King in chiefe cannot be aliened or dismembred without his licence and if it be it shall bee seised into the Kings hands as forfeit and the King shall be seised thereof in his own right again In 46. E. 3. it was found by office that William Bishop of Chester had leased unto one John Peston for his life a Mannour which was parcell of the Mannour of the said Bishopricke without licence and it was resolved by the Judges and other of the Kings Councell that the same was forfeit but by meditation of the said Councell the Bishop submitted himselfe to the King and made a fine and severall Scire facias issued out against them that had received the maine profits to answer unto the King thereof And thus much concerning alienation of Baronies without licence But on the other part if a Baron by tenure which holdeth any Honour Castle or Mannour 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 Honours Lands and Tenements in his owne name blood issue male Or else the same alienation is made for mony or other recompence or otherwise to a meere stranger and hereof ensueth this second conclusion or assertion That if such alienation be made for the continuance of the Barony in his name and blood or issue male as many have made the like then have the issues male together with the Barony be it Castle Honour or Mannour so holden held also and lawfully enjoyed the name stile title and dignity of a Baron and thereof have the heires generall or next heires female been excluded and debarred And for the proof of this assertion there may manifold presidents be produced wherof certain have happened almost in every age for 300 yeers space namely so long in effect as there have bin observations thereof of which some certain doe ensue William de Ferrariis Comes Derby obiit Anno 30. H. 3 Margareta Comitissa Derby Domina de Grooby Robertus de Ferrariìs Comes Derby Johannes de Ferariis Dom. de Charley Will. de Ferrar. Dom de Grooby ex dono Matris William de Ferrariis Dominus de Grooby It appeareth by an office found after the death of William de Ferrariis Lord of Grooby 23. H. 6. that Margaret Lady of Grooby gave to William Ferrars her second sonne and to the heires of his body the Mannour of Grooby c. By vertue of which gift the said William Ferrars and his heires were ever after Barons of Grooby Robert Walleron Baron of Kilpeck died in 1. Ed. 1. without heires of his body and Robert Walleron sonne of William brother of the said Robert was his next heire yet notwithstanding the said Robert dâ—ing gave to Allen Plagenet sonne of Alice his sister the Castle Mannour and Lordship of Kilpeck with the appurtenances To have unto the said Allen and to the heires of his body comming as appeareth by his office c. By vertue of which gift the said Allen was Baron of Kilpeck and summoned among other Barons to the Parliament and he died 27. E. 1. Walleron Baron of Kilpecke Robert Walleron Baron of Kilpec obiit sine exitu 5. E. 1 William Walleron Robert Walleron the next heir Alice married to Plagenet Allen Plagenet Baron of Kilpecke coron dono Edmond Deynecourt Baron of Blasteny obiit An. 20. E. 2 Edmond DeynCourt Isabel his next heire John Deincourt William Deyncourt BaroÌ„ of Blaxronry by reason of the entaile obiit 38. E. 3 William Deyncourt ante patrem William Deyncourt Baron of Blackney John Deincourt The King to all Christian people sendeth greeting c. Know ye that whereas lately for that our well-beloved and faithfull subject Edmond Deyncourt pondered and considered that both his Sirname and also his Armes after his death in the person of Isabell daughter of Edmond Deyncourt his heire apparent should be blotted out of memory most earnestly he desired that his Sirname and Armes after his death for ever might be had in remembrance To whose request for the worthy service as well to our father Edward late