DARCY. 21 body.( a ) He hi., before 1537, Dorothy, da. and b. of Sir John MkltON of Aston ( b ) co. York, by Catharine, da. of Sir Hugh Hastings of Fenwiek. She, who was aged 38 lit tlie death of her father, 26 Feb. 1544/5, died before her husband and was bur.
- it Braytou (not Bempston) co. YorkC-') He d. 28 Aug. 1557, desiring, in bis will, to
be bur. there. JX |M7. £ John (Dakcy), Lord Darcy, s. and h. aged 28 at the death of his father, was sum. to Pari. 23 Jany. (1558/0) 1 Eliz.( c ) (two days after which he took his seat in the precedence of the old [1509] Barony] till the time of liis death] the writ being sometimes directed " D vncv " [only] and sometimes " Daucy Dh Daucy," (LORD DARCY DE DAB0Y).(4) He was with the Earl of Bases in the expedition into Ireland. He m. Anne, da. of Henry Babington of Dethiek, CO. Derby. He d. 1587, or. according to some, 1602 and was Stir, at Aston afsd. Will pr. Feb. 1602 in the court of the Dean and Chapter of Westin. III. 15S7, 3. Jonx (Darcy), Lord Darcy, grandson and h., being or s. and h. of Michael Darcy, by Margaret, da. of Thomas WkntwohtH 1G02, of Woodhouse, co. York, which Michael was s. and h. ap. of the last t 0 Lord but died v.p. He was sum. to Pari, as a Baron, each writ 1635 from 5 Nov. (1605) 3 Jac. I to the last one 20 Jany. (1628/9) 4 Car. I. being directed "Johanni Daucy et Meiniix" (LORD DARCY AND MEINILL)( a ) probably in consequence of his descent from John (Daucy), Loud Daucy De Ivnayth (1347-56) by Elizabeth, da. and h. of Nicholas, Loud Meinii.l. Of this lady, however, he was net a representative, the Barony of Meinill [1 336] being vested in the coheirs of the Barony of Darcy [1332]. See p. 23. note "a." He hi. firstly Anne, da. of Sir Peter Freschevile of Stavely, co. Derby. He m. secondly Isabel, widow of Sir William Bowes (who </. 1613), relict formerly of Godfrey Foljajibe, da. of Sir Christopher What, Oh. Justice of the Queen's Bench, by Anne, da. of Nicholas Giklington. She d. 1622. He m. thirdly, Mary, da. of Thomas (Belasyse), 1st Viscount Fauconbeug, by Barbara, da. of Sir Henri- co As to this act of restoration Mr. Townseud, in his additions to Dugdale, observes that — " Though in the beginning of the Act it is enacted that he and the heirs male of his body shall be taken and kuowu by the name of Lord Darcy, and shall have place and voice in Parliament, &c. as a Baron of this realm ; yet it is afterwards further enacted and declare! that he and his heirs shall be restored in blood only as heir and heirs of the said Thomas, Lord Darcy, aud that he and his heirs shall be enabled to demand, ask, have, hold and enjoy all and every such honours, castles, lordships, manors, and all manner of hereditaments. Upon this view of the act I cannot but think that the fair construction is, that upon the failure of heirs male of his body the heirs general are let in to the inheritance, and this opinion will, I conceive, be much fortified, if not entirely confirmed, by what follows. When the restored Lord came to Parliament he was ranked and sat there as the junior Baron, and continued during his life to hold only such place as was due to him according to the date of his restitution ; but after his death his son's name was in- serted in the old place, and in 1 Eliz. he was admitted to the ancient seat and rank formerly enjoyed by his attainted ancestor (Lords' Journals, vol i. p. 514). I do not find any steps taken by him to obtain this admission, but the fact itself appears to me to amount to a decision of the House, especially as the Lords Darcy continued in undisturbed possession of that precedence till the male line became extinct in 1635. It seems, however, highly probable that this admission of Lord Darcy was considered as a regular consequence of the then recent decision in favour of Lord Stafford, who stood precisely in similar circumstances under an act of restitution, which, like this of Lord Darcy, limited the barony first to the heirs male of the body of the restored Lord." Coll. Tap. et dm. vol. viii. p. 164. ( b ) Hence the designation of the Barony as " Daucy of Aston." (°) Coll. Top. et. Gen. vol. viii. p. 164-165, where the mistake of the writs of 1 and 5 Eliz. being directed to Arthur, instead of John Darcy, is explained. ( d ) In the face of the Barony of Darcy having been limited to heirs male, it is not to be supposed that any slight discrepancy of description thereof in the writ would create another Barony distinct therefrom, viz. one in fee.
