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
then Countess of Killimeak in Ireland The Lady Dudley Dutchess of 〈…〉 The celebrated Beauties Barbara Villiers Dutchess of Cleaveland and Countess of Southampton and Louyse Rene Angelique de Carwell Dutchess of Portsmouth Countess of Petersfield c. Of Titles by Descent and Marriage there are Examples enough so that I need not trouble the Reader with any repetition I shall only set down some few general Observations not sufficiently discoursed of If a King's Daughter marry a Duke or an Earl illa â—emper dicitur Regalis by Law and Courtesie Noble women by descent Birthright or Creation remain Noble although they marry Husbands under that degree Also any Daughter of an Earl or Viscount that continues a Virgin or marrieth an Esquire yet she retaineth the Honour that sprung from her Parents and shall take place accordingly and be saluted by the Title of Lady If a Gentleman Knight or Peer marry a wife of ignoble Parents she shall enjoy the Title Name and Dignity of her Husband not only during his life but when she is a widow or afterwards married to an Ignoble person but this is by the Courtesie and not by the Law of the Realm Whereas on the contrary let a woman of Blood and Coat-Armour marry a Yeoman or Churle that is Ignoble and hath no Coat-Armour his Condition in point of Honour is in no respect advanced and she shall retain the Honour State and Dignity she was born unto Yet if she have iâ—â—ue by that Yeoman or Ignoble person she being an Heiress that Issue shall have liberty to bear her Coat but Sir Iohn Fern saith only for life and that on a Lozenge Shield with a difference of a Cinquefoil If a French Spanish or other woman Alien be married to a Peer of the Realm or to a Gentleman and be not denizened she is debarred all Priviledges and Titles due to her Husband nor can she claim any Dower or Joynture from him by the Laws of England Yet in some things our Laws are wonderful kind to the Female Sex especially procreandi causa As thus if a man and his wife separate for some fraud or private loathing of the Marriage Bed or the like and so continue for some years after which time the woman bringeth forth a Child which though got by another man and her Husband in all that time not having enjoyed her yet if he live in the Kingdom he must Father the Child and if before that time he had no Child that shall inherit his Lands if entailed or left without Will Also if a Wife be with Child when her Husband dieth and she marry another man before her delivery the latter Husband must own the Child which must be his Heir at Law if he were childless The Wives Dignities and Lands descend to her Heirs not to her Husband yet to encourage him to play the man the Courtesie of England is such that as the Wife hath the third part of his Estate in Lands for her Joynture during her life if a Widow so the Husband if he get his Wife with Child and that Child be heard to cry he shall enjoy all her Lands during his life The Wife can make no contract whatsoever that shall stand good in Law to the detriment of her Husband without his consent nor can she make a Will or dispose of what she hath whilst she is a Feme Covert â—he cannot be produced as a witness for or against her Husband nor shall she be accessory to his felonious acts although she receive the Goods or conceive the Fact if she be not personally an Actor therein Female Children are also by Law capable to give their consent to marriage at Seven years old and the Lord 's eldest Daughter is to have aid of his Tenants to marry her at that age though she may dissent from this Contract when she comes to Twelve but if at that Age she doth not dissent she is bound for life she may then make a Will and dispose of Goods and Chattels by it At Nine years of Age she is Dowable at Fourteen she might receive her Lands into her Hands and was then out of Wardship if she were Fourteen at the death of her Ancestor otherwise she was in Wardship till she accomplished Sixteen years and then she was free At One and twenty she is enabled to contract or alienate her Lands by Will or otherwise If there be no Son the Lands as well as Goods are equally divided amongst the Daughters who are Coheirs In ancient times Women amongst the Romans were thought worthy of enjoying peculiar favours and respect And out of their great love and honour to the Mother of Marcus Coriolanus for diverting his fury which he threatned the Citizens to their ruin for their ingratitude towards him the Citizens granted the Roman Dames the priviledge of wearing the Segmenta Aurea or Bordures of Gold and purple on their Garments They were also permitted to wear gold Ear-rings to have place on the way and in memorial of the said preservation there was erected a Temple dedicated to the Female Fortune Anne of Britain wife to Charles the Eighth of France as an ornamental Honour to several deserving Ladies instead of the Military Belt and Collar bestowed on them a Cordon or Lace and admonishing them to live chastly and devoutly and to put the greater esteem thereon the surrounded her Escocheon of Arms with the like Cordon from which Example it is now become the Custome for unmarried women to bear their Arms in form of a Lozenge which are commonly adorned with such a Cordon Ioseph Micheli Marquez for the further Honour of the Female Sex gives an Example of the Noble women of Tortosa in Aragon whom he calls Cavalleros or Knights For saith he Don Raymond last Earl of Barcellona who by right of his wife Petronilla sole Daughter and Heir to King Ramiro the Monk joyned his Principality to the Kingdom of Aragon having in the year 1149. taken from the Moors the City of Tortosa who in a few months after laid siege to the said City and reduced the Inhabitants to so great a strait that their intentions were of surrendring it up to the Moors but the women hearing thereof for the diverting their ruin put on mens Apparel and by a resolute Sally forced the Moors to raise the Seige And the Earl in acknowledgment of his thanks for this their Noble Act as a reward of Honour instituted an Order not much unlike a Military Order into which were admitted only those brave women and their Descendants The Badge which he assigned them was something like a Fryer's Capouch but of a crimson colour which they wore upon their Head-clothes Amongst the priviledges which this Earl granted them they were to be freed from all Taxes to have precedency of men in publick Meetings and that all the Iewels and Apparel of their deceased Husbands should be their own although of never so great value And these women having thus purchased this
Office of a King to fight the Battels of his people and rightly to judge them 1 Kings 8. And the Prophet David saith Be ye learned you that judge the Earth Whereto if they also would endeavour to have knowledge in the Principles and Grounds of the Laws of their own Country which they in due time inherit they shall be much the more enabled to govern their Subjects and it is a point of Wisdom in such to acknowledge that Rex datur propter Regnum non Regnum propter Regem And to move the Princes to these things there is an excellent Book Dialogue-wise between a Prince a King's Son of this Realm and Sir Iohn Fortescue a Judge entituled De laudibus Legum Angliae Many that have been Heirs apparent to the Crown of England ever since the Norman Conquest have been taken away either by their natural deaths or by violence during the life of their Ancestors so that they have not attained to the Crown William the only Son of Henry the First was drowned in his passage from Normandy his Father reigning Eustace King Stephen's only Son died mad to the great grief of the King his Father William the eldest Son of King Henry the Second died in the Fourth year of his Age and in the Third year of his Fathers Reign King Henry the Second's Son called Curt-Mantel was in his Father's life time crowned King by the Name of King Henry the younger but died in the life time of his Father Geffrey the fourth Son of the said King died during the Reign of Richard Coeur de Leon his third Brother which King Richard had no Son and so Geffrey was Heir apparent to the Crown King Edward the First had Issue Iohn Henry and Alphons but all three died in their Childhood in their Father's life Edward the Black Prince of famous memory eldest Son to King Edward the Third died before his Father Richard the Third had Issue only one Son named Edward who died without Issue Arthur the eldest Son and Heir apparent to King Henry the Seventh died in the life time of his Father Henry Prince of Wales eldest Son to King Iames also left the World before his Father These Examples may serve as a Mirror for all succeeding Princes and others to see how transitory the Glory of this World is whereof the saying of the Princely Prophet David may never be out of remembrance Psal. 82. I have said ye are Gods and ye are all the Children of the most High but ye shall die like men and ye Princes like others Also divers other Heirs apparent and those that have been in possession of their Crowns have been defeated by Usurpers And namely Robert Duke of Normandy eldest Son to William the Conqueror was defeated of his Birth-right by his two younger Brethren William Rufus and Henry successively one after another and after Six and twenty years Imprisonment having both his Eyes put out died in the Reign of his Brother Henry Maud the sole Daughter of the said King Henry was defeated of her Birth-right to the Crown by Stephen the Son of her Fathers Sister Arthur the only Son and Heir of Geffrey the fourth Son to Henry the Second was next Heir to the Crown after the death of his Uncle Richard the first King of that Name who died without Issue his Father being dead before but his Uncle Iohn Son to the said Henry the Second defeated him not only of his right to the Kingdom but also of his Life and that by starving him King Edward the Second was deposed by his eldest Son who in the life time of his Father took upon him to be the King of England Richard the only Son to Edward the black Prince and next Heir to the Crown after the death of his Grandfather King Edward the Third was defeated both of his Crown and Life by Henry of Lancaster Son to Iohn of Gaunt who was but the fourth Son of King Edward the Third yea although Lionel the third Son of the said King Edward had Issue Philip his only Daughter who by consequence was next to the Crown before the Issue of Iohn of Gaunt which Philip was married to Edward Mortimer Earl of March from whom the House of York by the name of Edward the Fourth are lineally descended For William of Hatfield second Son to King Edward the Third died young without Issue King Henry the Sixth having but one Son named Edward he was slain in the life time of his Father and the King himself deposed by Edward the Fourth and murthered in the Tower So the Act of Parliament made between them for an indented Peace exemplified in our Books of Law Edward and Richard the two only Sons to Edward the Fourth after the descent of the Crown and before the Coronation of Prince Edward were both of them murthered in the Tower by their Uncle Richard Duke of Glocester who thereupon took upon him the Crown although there were remaining alive divers Daughters of the late King Edward the Fourth During these troublesome and tragical times each of the Kings prevailing attainted the other their Adversary of High Treason by Act of Parliament intending utterly to disable them and make them to be incapable by the Law of the Crown And it is a matter worthy of Observation how the Hand of God did not forget to pursue Revenge in these Cases for William Rufus died without Issue Henry his Brother had a Son and one Daughter but his Son died an Infant and his only Daughter Maud was defeated of her Birthright by Stephen King Iohn who defeated Arthur his Nephew of his Birthright and Life lived in continual Wars never enjoyed Peace but was driven to submit himself and subject his Kingdom to the Pope In his time Normandy which King William the First brought with him and which in five Descents continued in actual Obedience of the Kings of England was in the sixth year of his Reign lost until King Henry the Fifth recovered it again and left it to King Henry the Sixth who again lost it in the Eight and twentieth year of his Reign as doth appear both in our Chronicles and in our Books of Law Concerning the violence done to King Henry the Second albeit Edward his Son enjoyed a long and prosperous Reign yet his Successor King Richard was in the like violent manner imprisoned deprived and put to death King Henry the Fourth by whom King Richard was deposed did exercise the chiefest Acts of his Reign in executing those who conspired with him against King Richard His Son had his Vertue well seconded by Felicity during whose Reign by the means of Wars in France the humour against him was otherwise imployed But his next Successor King Henry the Sixth was in the very like manner deprived and together with his young Son Edward imprisoned and put to death by King Edward the Fourth This Eward died not without suspicion of poyson and after his death his two Sons were likewise
disinherited imprisoned and murthered by their cruel Uncle the Duke of Glocester who being both a Tyrant and Usurper was justly encountred by King Henry the Seventh in the Field So infallible is the Law of Justice in revenging Cruelties and Injuries not always observing the present time wherein they are done but often calling them into reckoning when the Offenders retain least memory of them But as the saying is Ex malis moribus bonae leges oriuntur so their Tragical and Miserable Combustions have occasioned that the Law hath established more certain Resolutions in all these cases and pretences against the right Heir to the Crown than before For first though a common Opinion was conceived that a Conqueror might freely dispose of the Succession of that Estate which he had obtained by the purchase of his Sword which was the Title pretended for William Rufus yet now in our Books this difference is taken for Law viz. between the Conquest of a Kingdom from a Christian King and the Conquest of a Kingdom from an Infidel For if a King come to a Christian Kingdom by Conquest seeing he hath Vitae necis potestatem he may at his pleasure alter and change the Laws of that Kingdom but until he doth make an alteration thereof the ancient Laws do stand and therefore the case of Rufus the ancient Law of this Realm being That the eldest Son should inherit and that a King in possession cannot devise the same by his last Will or by other Act therefore the said William Rufus was no other than a Usurper But if a Christian King should Conquer a Kingdom from an Infidel and being then under his subjection there ipso facto the Laws of the Infidels are abrogated for that they be not only against Christianity but against the Law of God and Nature mentioned in the Decalogue and in that case until certain Laws be established amongst them the King by himself and such Judges as he shall appoint shall judge them and their causes according to natural Equity in such sort as Kings in ancient times did within their Kingdoms before any certain municipal Laws were given And if a King have a Kingdom by Title of Descent there seeing by the Laws of that Kingdom he doth inherit the Kingdom he cannot change those Laws of himself without consent of Parliament Also if a King have a Christian Kingdom by Conquest as King Henry the Second had Ireland after that King Iohn had given unto them being under his Obedience and Subjection the Laws of England for the Government of that Country no succeeding King could alter the same without Parliament In Succession of Kings a question hath been Whether the King who hath had Sons both before and after he came to the Crown which of them should succeed he that was born before as having the prerogative of his Birthright or he that was born after And for each Reasons and Examples have not been wanting For Xerxes the Son of Darius King of Persia being the eldest Son after the enthroning his Father carried away the Empire from his Brother Arthemones or Artobazanes who was born before his Father came to the Royal Possession thereof So Arceses the Son of another Darius born in the time of his Fathers Empire carried away the Garland from his Brother Cyrus born before his Father came to the Empire So Lewis Duke of Millain born after his Father was Duke was preferred to the Dukedom before his Brother Galiasius born before the Dukedom But notwithstanding these Examples and the Opinion of sundry Doctors to the contrary common use of Succession in these latter days hath been to the contrary and that not without good reason for that it is not meet that any that hath right to any Succession by the prerogative of their Birthright such as all elder Brothers have should be put by the same And this was the pretence of Henry the First against Robert his eldest Brother Also sundry Contentions have risen in Kingdoms between the Issue of the eldest Son of the King dying before his Father and the second Brother surviving who should Reign after the death of the Father the Nephew challenging the same unto him by the Title of his Fathers Birthright and by way of Representation Cok. part 3. cap. 4. the other claiming as eldest Son to his Father at the time of his death Upon which Title in old time there grew a Controversie between Arcus the Son of Arrotatus eldest Son of Cleomenes King of Lacedemonia and Cleomenes second Son of Cleomenes Uncle to the said Arcus But upon debate of the matter the Senate gave their Sentence for Arcus against Cleomenes Besides Enominus King of Lacedemon having two Sons Polydectes and Licurgius Poyldectes dying without Children Licurgius succeeded in the Kingdom but after he had understood that Polydectes Widow had a Child he yielded the Crown to him wherein he dealt far more religiously than either did King Iohn or King Richard the Third For King Iohn upon the like pretence not only put by Arthur Plantaginet his eldest Brother's Son from the Succession of the Kingdom but also most unnaturally took away his life And King Richard the Third to come to the Crown did most barbarously not only slay his two innocent Nephews but also defamed his Mother in publishing to the World that the late King his Brother was a Bastard Our Stories do obscurely note that Controversie of like matter had like to have grown between King Richard the Second and Iohn of Gaunt his Uncle and that he had procured the Counsel fo sundry great Learned Men to this purpose but that he found the hearts of divers Noblemen of this Kingdom and especially the Citizens of London to be against him whereupon he desisted from his intended purpose and acknowledged his Nephews Right And the reason of the Common Law of England is notable in this point and may be collected out of the ancient Authors of the same Glanvile lib. 7. cap. 1. Bracton lib. 7. c. 30. and by Brittan fol. 119. For they say Whosoever is Heir to another aut est haeres jure proprietatis as the eldest Son shall inherit only before his Brothers aut jure representationis as where the eldest Son dieth in the life of his Father his Issue shall inherit before the youngest Son for though the youngest sit magis propinquus yet jure representationis the Issue of the eldest Son shall inherit for that he doth represent the person of his Father And as Bracton saith jus proprietatis which his Father had by his Birthright doth descend unto him aut jure propinquitatis ut propinqui jus excludit remotum remotus remotiorem aut jure sanguinis And yet Glanvile Lord Chief Justice under King Henry the Second seemeth to make this questionable here in England Who should be preferred the Uncle or the Nephew Also it hath been resolved for Law That the possession of the Crown purgeth all defects
of Nature which he hath vouchsafed unto us because in truth in the Succession of Children a mortal man is made as it were immortal neither unto any mortal men at leastwise unto Princes not acknowledging Superiors can any thing happen in worldly causes more happy and acceptable than that their Children should become notable in all vertuous Goodness Manners and Increase of Dignity so as they which excel other men in Nobleness and Dignity endowments of Nature might not be thought of others to be exceeded Hence it is that we that great goodness of God which is shewed unto us in our felicity not to pass in silence or to be thought not to satisfie the Law of Nature whereby we are chiefly provoked to be well affected and liberal to those in whom we behold our Blood to begin to flourish coveting with great and fatherly affection that the perpetual memory of our Blood with Honour and increase of Dignity and all praise may be affected our well beloved Son Charles Duke of Albony Marquis of Ormond Count of Ross and Lord of Ardmannoth our second begotten Son in whom the Regal form and beauty worthy Honour and other gifts of Vertue do now in the best hopes shine in his tender years We erect create make and ordain and to him the Name Style State Title and Dignity and Authority and Honour of the Duke of York do give to him that Name with the Honour to the same belonging and annexed by the girding of the Sword Cap and Cirtlet of Gold put upon his Head and the delivery of a Golden Verge we do really invest To have and to hold the same Name Style State Dignity Authority and Honour of the Duke of York unto the aforesaid Charles our second begotten Son and to the Heirs male of his Body lawfully begotten for ever And that the aforesaid Charles our second begotten Son according to the decency and state of the said Name of Duke of York may more honourably carry himself we have given and granted and by this our present Charter we confirm for us and our Heirs unto the aforesaid Duke and his Heirs for ever out of Farms Issues Profits and other Commodities whatsoever coming out of the County of York by the hands of the Sheriff of the said County for the time being at the times of Easter and Michaelmas by even portions For that express mention of other Gifts and Grants by us unto the said Duke before time made in these Presents doth not appear notwithstanding these being Witnesses The most excellent and most beloved Henry our Firstbegotten Son Ulrick Duke of Hellet Brother of the Queen our beloved Wife and the Reverend Father in Christ Richard Archbishop of Canterbury Primate and Metropolitan of all England and also our beloved and faithful Counsellor Thomas Lord Elsmere our Chancellor of England Thomas Earl of Suffolk Chamberlain of our Houshold and our dear Cosin Thomas Earl of Arundel our welbeloved Cosins and Counsellors Henry Earl of Northumberland Edward Earl of Worcester Master of our Horse George Earl of Cumberland and also our welbeloved Cosins Henry Earl of Southampton William Earl of Pembroke and also our welbeloved Cosins and Counsellors Charles Earl of Devonshire Master of our Ordinance Henry Earl of Northampton Warden of the Cinque Ports John Earl of Warwick Robert Viscount Cranborne our Principal Secretary and our well-beloved and faithful Counsellor Edward Lord Zouch President of our Council within the Principality and Marches of Wales and also our welbeloved and trusty Robert Lord Willoughby of Eresby William Lord Mounteagle Gray Lord Chandois William Lord Compton Francis Lord Norris Robert Lord Sidney our welbeloved and faithful Counsellor William Lord Knowles Treasurer of our Houshold and our welbeloved and faithful Counsellor George Dunbar Lord of Barwick Chancellor of our Exchequer Edward Bruce of Kinloss Master of the Rolls of our Chancery and also our welbeloved and faithful Thomas Eareskine of Birketon Captain of our Guard James Lord Barmermoth and others Given by our Hand at our Palace at Westminster in the Second year of our Reign of England c. King Edward the Third in the third year of his Reign by his Charter in Parliament and by Authority of Parliament did create Edward his eldest Son called the black Prince Duke of Cornwal not only in Title but cum feodo with the Dutchy of Cornwal as by the Letters Patents may appear in Coke's Eighth Part in the Pleadings Habendum tenendum eidem Duci ipsius haeredum suorum Regum Angliae filiis Primogenitis dicti loci Ducibus in Regno Angliae ei haereditarie successuris So that he who is hereditable must be Heir apparent to the King of England and of such a King who is Heir to the said Prince Edward and such a one shall inherit the said Dukedom which manner of limitation of Estate was short and excellent varying from the ordinary Rules of the Common Law touching the framing of any Estate of Inheritance in Fee-simple or Fee-tayl and nevertheless by the Authority of Parliament a special Fee-simple is in that case only made as by Judgment may appear in the Book aforesaid fol. 27. and 27 Ed. 3.41 b. And ever since that Creation the said Dukedom of Cornwall hath been the peculiar Inheritance of the King 's eldest Son during the life of the King his Father so that he is ever Dux natus non creatus and the Duke at the very time of his Birth is taken to be of full and perfect Age so that he may send that day for his Livery of the said Dukedom And the said black Prince was the first Duke of England after the Conquest For though Bracton who made his Book in the Reign of King Henry the Third saith sunt sub rege Duces as appeareth that place is to be understood of the ancient Kings before the Conquest For in Magna Charta which was made in the Ninth of King Henry the Third we find not the name 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 And the eldest Son of every King after his Creation was Duke of Cornwall as for example Henry of Monmouth eldest Son of King Henry the Fourth Henry of Windsor eldest Son of King Henry the Fifth Edward of Westminster eldest Son of King Edward the Fourth Arthur of Winchester eldest son of King Henry the Seventh and Edward of Hampton first Son of King Henry the Eighth But Richard of Burdeaux who was the first Son of Edward 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 apparent to the Crown yet because he was not the Firstbegotten Son of a King for his Father died in the life of King Edward the Third the said Richard was not within the limitation of the Grant and Creation by
Adversaries in this manner viz. The Writ of Summons to the Parliament whereby the Baron by Writ hath his Original is to call that Honourable and Worthy Person so summoned to the number of that Right High and Honourable Assembly and to be a Judge to sit hear and determine Life and Member Plea and right of Land if there shall come occasion likewise to give Counsel and Advise in the most mighty Affairs of the Realm But these things are convenient for the quality and condition of men unfitting and altogether unbeseeming the Sex of women Ergo having respect unto the scope and final purpose of such Writs such Inheritances should only descend unto the Heir Female The Second Argument contra Secondly If it shall be answered That although the Heir Female to whom such Inheritance is descended be unfit in her own person for the accomplishing of these things yet she may marry with one sufficiently able for her and in her behalf to execute the same This Answer will neither satisfie nor salve the inconveniences For admit that such an Heir Female were at full Age at the death of her Ancestor unmarried for it doth lye in her own choice then whom shall be her Husband The Third Argument contra Thirdly If such Husband shall be called by the right of his Wife the Writ shall make some mention thereof for otherwise it may well be taken that the Husband was chosen in his own person and in behalf of himself and not in regard of his wife or such pretended Dignity descended unto him But there was never such a Writ of Summons seen wherein the wife was mentioned And if the husband of such a wife have been called to the Parliament which is always by General Writ not mentioning his wife he is thereby made a Baron of himself by virtue of the said Writ Having thus heard both sides to dispute place it doth now require to interpose Opinion to compound the Controversie This point in queâ—tion is somewhat perplexed by means of difficult Presidents For first it is observed That some Presidents do prove that Baronies by Writ have descended unto Heirs Female whose husbands have been called to Parliament whether in regard of themselves or in respect of their wives right it maketh no matter but since it is that the marriage of such Ladies gave that occasion to be summoned and such husbands and their Poâ—â—erity have and do lawfully bear the same Title of Dignity which the Ancestors of such a wife did before rightfully bear For by this Controversie theâ—e is no purpose to call the right of such Noble Houses into question Howbeit Secondly this is to be observed out of the Presidents and to be acknowledged of every dutiful Subject That the King's Majesty is nevertheless at liberty to call to his High Council of Parliament whom he shall in his Princely Wisdom think fit which by his Majestie 's Noble Progenitors have in former Ages likewise observed And therefore whereas Ralph Lord Cromwell being a Baron by Writ died without Issue having two Sisters and Coheirs Elizabeth the eldest who married Sir Thomas Nevile Knight and Ioan the younger who married Sir Humphrey Butcher Knight who was called to Parliament as Lord Cromwell and not the said Sir Thomas Thirdly It is to be observed That if a Baron by Writ die without Heir Male having his Daughter Sister or other Collateral Heir Male that can challenge the Land of the said Baron deceased by any ancient entail or otherwise the Title of such an Heir Female hath heretofore been allowed as by the honourable Opinions and Relations of the Right Honourable the late Commissioners in the Office of Earl-Marshal signified unto the late Queen upon Petition of the Sister and Heir of Gregory Lord Dacres deceased may appear Moreover in the same Pedigree of the Lord Dacres it was expressed That Thomas sometimes Lord Dacres had issue Thomas his eldest Son Ralph his Second and Humphrey his third Thomas the eldest died in the life of his Father having issue Ioan Daughter and Heir who was married to Sir Richard Fines Knight and after Thomas Lord Dacres his Grandfather and Father to the said Ralph and Humphrey died after whose death Henry the Sixth by his Letters Patents bearing date at Westminster the Seventh of November in the Seventh year of his Reign reciting the said Pedigree and Marriage doth by his said Letters Patents accept declare and repute the said Richard Fines to be Lord Dacres and one of the Barons of the Realm But afterwards in the time of Edward the Fourth the said Humphrey Dacres after the attainder of the said Ralph and himself by an Act of Parliament which was the first of Edward the Fourth And after the death of the said Ralph and the Reversal of the said Act by another Act in the Twelfth of Edward the Fourth the said Humphrey made challenge unto the said Barony and unto divers Lands of the said Thomas his Father whereupon both parties after their Title had been considered of in Parliament submitted themselves to the Arbitrement of King Edward the Fourth and entred into Bond each to other for the performance thereof whereupon the said King in his Award under his Privy Seal bearing date at Westminster the Eighth of April Anno Regni sui decimo tertio did Award that the said Richard Fines in the right of Ioan his wife and the Heirs of his body by the said Ioan begotten should keep have and use the same Seat and Place in every Parliament as the said Thomas Dacres Knight Lord Dacres had used and kept and that the Heirs of the body of the said Thomas Dacres Knight then late Lord Dacres begotten should have and hold to them and to their Heirs the Mannor of Holbeach And further That the said King Edward did Award on the other part that the said Humphrey Dacres Knight and the Heirs Males of the said Thomas late Lord Dacres should be reputed had named and called the Lord Dacres of Gillesland and that he and the Heirs Males of the body of the said Thomas then late Lord Dacres should have use and keep the place in Parliament next adjoyning beneath the said place which the said Richard Fines Knight Lord Dacres then had and occupied And that the Heirs of the body of the said Ioan his wife shall have and enjoy and that the Heirs Males of the said Thomas Dacres late Lord Dacres should have to them and the Heirs Males of their bodies begotten the Mannor of Iothington c. And so note that the name of the ancient Barony namely Gillesland remained unto the Heir Male to whom the Land was entailed Moreover this is specially observed If any Baron by Writ do die having no other Issue than Female and that by some special entail or other assurance there be an Heir Male which doth enjoy all or great part of the Lands Possessions and Inheritances of such Baron deceased the Kings have used to call to the
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
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