LECTURES

ON THE

LAWS OF ENGLAND.

LECTURE XX.

Lords of Parliament or Peers....Earls and Barons....The earlier state of Baronies in England....The Barones majores and minores....Barons by writ and by letters patent....The different ranks of Nobility.

NEXT in rank to the king are the lords, that held immediately of him by military service, as long as that species of tenure subsisted; and whom, from their privilege of sitting in Parliament in their own rights, are frequently called Lords of Parliament, and in common speech are called Peers, though that word properly signifies any co-vassals to the same lord. Thus every immediate vassal of a baron are peers of that barony, and the accurate description of the great personages I am speaking of is Pares Regni. Of these there were, anciently, two ranks only, in England, Earls and Barons. Indeed, abroad also, to speak properly, there were but two likewise for there was no difference in power and privilege between the dukes and counts, or earls. But as every

earl is a baron, and something more, and as it is a maxim of our law, that every lord of parliament sits there by virtue of his barony, it will, in the first place, be necessary to see what a baron is.

Baron,

The word baron of itself originally, did not, more than peer, signify an immediate vassal of the king; for earls palatine had their barons, that is, their immediate tenants; and, in old records, the citizens of London are stiled barons, and so are the representatives of the cinque ports called to this day. therefore, at first signified only the immediate tenant of that superior whose baron he is said to be, but by length of time it became restrained to those who, properly and exactly speaking, were barones regis & regni, and even not to all of these, but to such only as had manors and courts therein. For though, by the principles of the feudal constitutions, every immediate military tenant of the crown, however small his holding, was obliged to assist the king with his advice, and entitled likewise to give or refuse his assent to any new law or subsidy, that is, to attend in parliament. This attendance was too heavy and burthensome upon such as had only one or two knights fees, and could not be complied with without their ruin. Hence arose the omission of issuing writs to such, and which, being for their ease, they acquiesced in, attendance in parliament being considered at that time as a burthen. Thus they lost that right they were entitled to by the nature of the tenure, until the method was found out of admitting them by representation. Hence arose the distinction between tenants by barony, and tenants by knight service in capite of the king. The former were such military ten

ants of the king, as had estates so considerable as qualified them, without inconvenience, to attend in parliament, and who were therefore entitled to be summoned. The quantum of this estate was regularly thirteen knights fees and one third, as that of a count or earl was twenty; that is, as a knight's fee was then reckoned at twenty pounds per annum, the baron's revenue was four hundred marks, or two hundred sixty six pounds thirteen shillings and fourpence, and the earl's four hundred pounds, answering in value of money at present to about two thousand six hundred, and four thousand pounds yearly*.

Such was the nature of all the baronies of England for about two hundred years after the conquest; and they are called baronies by tenure, because the dignity and privileges were annexed to the lands they held; and if these were alienated with the consent of the king (for without that they could not) the barony went over to the alienée. The manner of creating these barons was by investiture, that is, by arraying them with a robe of state, and a cap of honor, and girding on a sword, as the symbols of their dignity. Of these Matthew Paris tells us there were two hundred and fifty in the time of Henry the Third, and while they stood purely on this footing, it was not in the king's power to increase the number of the baronies, though of barons perhaps he might. For as William the Conqueror was obliged to gratify several of his great officers according to the number of men they brought, with two or more baronies, whenever these fell into the hands of the crown by escheat, *Madox, Antiq. of the Exchequer, vol. 1. p. 197, 198– Baronia Anglica, book 1. chap.1 Spelman, voc. Baro.

either for want of heirs, or by forfeiture, it was in the king's power, and was his interest, to divide them into separate hands. The same thing likewise happened, when, by an intermarriage with an heiress, more baronies than one came into the hands of a nobleman, and escheated to the crown*.

But the number of these feudal baronies could not, strictly or properly speaking, be increased by the king; for they could be created only out of lands, and there were no lands vacant to create new ones out of, for the king's demesne's were, in those days, unalienable. However, we find, at the end of Henry the Third's reign, and even in John's, that the number of baronies were actually increased, and a distinction made between the barones majores, and minores. The majores were those who stood upon the old footing of William, and had lands sufficient in law, namely, the number of knights fees requisite. The minores were such as held by part of a barony; as when an old barony descended to, and was divided among sisters; in which case, when the husband of the sister whom the king pleased to name, was the baron of parlia.... ment; or else were newly carved out of the old baronies that had fallen in by escheat; as supposing the king had granted six knights fees of an old barony to one, to hold with all the burthens, and to do the service of an entire barony, and the remaining seven and one third to another, on the same terms. But the attendance of these minor barons also, at length became too burthensome for their circumstances, and many of them were glad to be excused. The kings took then the power of passing by such as they thought *Brady's introduction, in append. Baronia Anglica, p. 33.