Page:The Complete Peerage Ed 1 Vol 1.djvu/311

 BEAUMONT. 289 Barony in his favour.( c ) He was placed in the House next below the Lord Cainoys, a creation of 1383, the writ of 1432 (and uot those to the earlier Barons) being considered as the one proved. He in. 9 Sep. 1S4-1, Isabella Anne, 1st da. of John Cavendish (Ruownk), 3rd Loud Kilmaink [I.], by his first wife Eliza, da. of David Lyon. He d. 16 Aug. 1854. Will pr. Oct. 1304. His widow is now (1885) living. ami, liually (5) Hastings, which, though in abeyance only 300 years, had been dormant for about 450 years, the "late, lamented, Peer" (Lord Hastings, Earl of Pembroke, the last person who, with any right thereto, bore the title) having d. in the reign of Richard II ! ! ! Had this pace of terminating abeyances been continued, the Peerage would, since the Queen's accession, have by this time been "adorned" with about 100 such (strange) Baronies consisting of Peers of ijrcat antiquity as to precedence, but whose ancestors had for centuries and centuries been guiltless of any pretence to nobility. Neither was Store any lack of candidates for such honours. There was (1) Sir Henry Bedingfeld, who petitioned for the Barony of Grandison, of which he appears to have represented one-fourth of one-third ; (2) Mr. Selby Lowndes, who petitioned for the Barony of Montacute, being modestly content with that (one) peerage for himself so that his cousin (3) Mr. William Lowndes of Cheshaiu should have the Barony of Monthermer ; (4) Sir John Shelley petitioned for the Barony of Sudklet ; (5) Col. Keineys-Tyute for the Barony of Wharton ; (6) Mr. Dolman for the Barony of Stapleton ; (7) Sir Charles Tempest for the Barony of Scales ; (8) Sir Robert Burdett. for the Baronies of Berkeley, Tyes, Latimer and Badles.mere, &c, &c. The cry was still " They come, they come." People began to think that the words of Sir Guy le Scroope in the " Lay of St. Cuthbert" (then recently published in " the Ingoldsby Legends") were prophetic of this scramble for Baronies ; " What can delay do Vaux and de Saye ? ♦ * « * * And de Nokes, and de Styles and [de Gates and de] Grey, And de Roe and de Doe .' Poyuiugs and Vavasour where be they S Fitz Walter, Fitz Osbert, Fitz Hugh, and Fitz John And the Mandevilles, &c, &c. It is indeed difficult to say what did " delay " a claim to these and may other such Baronies, but, happily, the good sense of the Crown itself preserved the Peerage from being thus swamped, and, since 1841, it became generally understood that if " Jones, Brown and Robinson " are to be elevated to the Peerage, their place wodd be at the bottom instead of the top of the Roll of Barons, notwithstanding that the representation of one-ninth of one-eighth of one-seventh of one-sixth (or any smaller fraction) of some early Barony by Writ (wihcard of for centuries) might be vested in them. This most objectionable system of thus raising new men to the Peerage so as to rank above the oldest creations is admirably described by Disraeli in his novel called "Sybil " (1845), where Mr. Hatton, the famous Peerage lawyer of the Inner Temple, explains how he can make a Peer, adding " The Whigs and I have so deluged the House of Lords that if the Tories come in, there will be no Peers made." — " If the Whigs go out, perhaps they may distribute a coronet or two among themselves, and / shall this year make three."—" You would like to be a Peer. Well you are really Lord Vavasour, hut there is a difficulty in establishing your undoubted right, from the single-writ-of- summons difficulty."—" Your claim on the Barony of Lovel is very good ; I could recommend your pursuing it, did not another, more inviting still, present it-self. In a word, if you wish to be Lord BardolI'H, I will undertake to make you so, &c " — will give you precedence over every Peer on the roll, except three (and I made those j, and it will not cost you a paltry twenty or thirty thousand pounds." ( c ) Baronies called out of abeyance. [Note. — The abeyance of the (united) Baronies of Mowbray and Segrave appears to have been terminated by Ric. Ill in favour of John Howard, 1st Duke of Norfolk and was certainly determined in favour of the Howard family before the reign of Elizabeth. There is some uncertainty both as to the Barony of Furnival, and the Barony of Cherleton, i.e. as to whether a writ of 140SJ, in one case, and of 1482, in the other, terminated the abeyance or cr. a new Barony.]