Page 57
Answer.
The Case of the Lord Delaware lately e∣rected a Resolution somewhat answerable to this Question: Thomas Delaware in the third of Edward the Sixth, being in some displea∣sure with William West his Heir and Nephew, who was Father to Thomas late Lord Dela∣ware, and Grandfather to Henry Lord Dela∣ware that Nevis procured by Act of Parlia∣ment, by which the said William West was; during his natural life only, clearly disabled to claim, demand, or have any manner of Right, Title, or Interest by Descent, Remainder, or otherwise, in or to the Mannors, Lands, Te∣nements, or Hereditaments, Title and Digni∣ty of Thomas Lord Delaware his Uncle, &c. After the said Thomas Delaware died, and the said William West was in the time of Queen Mary attainted of Treason by Verdict, but par∣doned by the said Queen; and afterwards by Parliament, in the time of Queen Elixabeth, was restored; and in the fourth year of her Reign was created Lord Delaware by Patent, and took place in Parliament accordingly, for that by the said Act of Parliament of Edward the Sixth, he was excluded to challenge the former ancient Barony; and after he died. Now whether Thomas Delaware should take his place according to the ancient Barony by Writ, or according to his Father's Creation by Patent, was the Question. The Opinions of the late Queens Council, being his Majestie's Attorney General and Solicitor, were, That the acceptance of the new Creation by the said William West could not extinguish the ancient Dignity, for that he had not the ancient Dig∣nity in him at that time of his Creation; but the Dignity was by the Act of Parliament 3 Edw. 6. in the ballance of suspence or conside∣ration of Law, and he thereby utterly disabled to have the same during his life, only so as o∣ther acceptance could not extinguish that Dig∣nity which he then had not, nor could not con∣clude his Heir, who was not disabled by the Parliament 3 Edw. 6. to claim the ancient Barony; which Opinion of theirs was seen and allowed by the then Chief Justice of Eng∣land, and Lord Chief Baron, and so signified to the Lord Keeper. But this to be noted by the Reasons made for the said Resolution, though if the said Sir William West had been Baron, and entituled, and in possession of the ancient Dignity, when he accepted the ancient Creation, the Law perchance might have been otherwise; but that remains as yet unresolved: Nevertheless the Rule is, Eodem modo, quo quid constituitur, dissolvitur. But by a Grant which is but a matter of Fact, a man cannot transfer his Title of Honour. And thus much concerning the Degrees of Barons within this Realm upon this occasion, for the better un∣derstanding and direction of that which fol∣loweth to be handled. And in this place I think it not impertinent to mention one Case, which I met with in our Books of Common Law, concerning the Descent of a Title of Honour, whereof the Ancestor had Estate in Feesimple; there is a Maxim in the Law, Pos∣sessio fratris in feodo facit sororemesse haeredem: But if a man by any of the three means a∣foresaid be created into a Title of Dignity to him and his Heirs for ever, and so have Issue by one wife a Son and a Daughter, and hath also a Son by a second wife; afterwards the Father dieth, and his eldest Son entreth into all his Father's Inheritances, and also enjoyeth the Titles and Dignities which his Father had, but dieth without Issue: In this Case the Dig∣nity shall descend upon the younger Son, though he be but of the half blood to him that last enjoyed that Name and Title of descent, and shall not descend to his Sister of the whole blood. And yet in this case he shall only be her Brother's Heir of all his Feesimple Lands; and the reason thereof is, because possessio fra∣tris is the name and sole cause which may give Title to her, his Sister, which faileth in this case of Dignity; for it cannot be said that her elder brother was in possession of his Title of Honour, no more than of his blood; so as neither by his own act, nor any act to be done by any other, did gain more actual possession (if so it may be termed) then by the Law did descend to him: and therefore the younger brother may well by the Law make himself Heir unto his Father of the Honour, that he cannot be heir unto his brother: So that this word [Possession] which is no other than pedis positio, extendeth only unto such things of which a man may, by h••s entry, or other act be possessed, and doth require actual pos∣session. Coke's third part, 92.
Having thus much treated concerning the Creations, and other things incident to the de∣grees of Nobility, I cannot omit some things concerning the sufficiency and ability of Estate, which the Law doth require to be in every of them, according to their several Dignities. The Common Law (which always will deco∣rum and conveniency be observed, considering the Charges and Dignities appertaining to these Degrees and Dignities, being Offices of principal Service to the King and Realm, both in War and Peace) hath ordered, that each of them ought to have a convenient Por∣tion and Inheritance in Land to support the said Dignity, which Supplies are as Sinews conjoyned in the same: For in Vertue and Ri∣ches (as Aristotle confesseth) all the old No∣bility consisted, and which two Properties maketh a good Complement; for utilior est sapientia cum divitiis conjuncta. Therefore a Knight's Fee which he ought to have is Twen∣ty pounds Land by the year; a Baron's thir∣teen Knights Fees and a quarter; and an Earl's twenty Knights Fees. For always the fourth