Page:The Complete Peerage Ed 2 Vol 4.djvu/727

APPENDIX H 705 1 641. Charles Longueville, heir general of the Barony of Grey of Ruthyn, prevailed against Henry, Earl of Kent, the heir male. This case involved a question of the half-blood, and the judges unanimously decided that " there cannot be a possess'w fnitris in point of honour." (°) Stt post, sub Peerage Cases. 1660. William Sandys, son of Elizabeth, half-sister of William Sandys, Lord Sandys {d. s.p. 1629), was allowed the Barony of Sandys 4 May 1660, "the House being satisfied of his lordship's title to the Honour. "(•») 1667. George, Duke of Buckingham, was allowed the Barony of Ros, which had devolved on his mother, Katherine, in 1632 by the death of her father, Francis, Earl of Rutland. See post, sub Peerage Cases. 1670. Benjamin Mildmay was allowed the Barony of Fitzwalter, for which his grandfather had petitioned in 1641. The claim was through the half-blood, and the judges unanimously agreed that "the half-blood was no impediment to the descent ot a dignity to an heir general." They also gave the important opinion that "if a baron in tee simple be made an earl, the barony will descend to the heir general, whether the earldom continue or be extinct. "(') See post, sub Peerage Cases. An examination of the above list shows [a] that a female heir general's chances of succeeding to a barony by writ depended largely on whether there was an heir male to oppose her. For example, Margaret, wife of Samson Lennard, who was unopposed by an heir male, obtained the Barony of Dacre at about the same time that Lady Fane, who had to contend with the heir male possessing the estates, failed to obtain the Barony of Aber- gavenny; [li] that the right to a barony by writ transmitted through a female to, and claimed by, a male was more readily recognised than the right of a female heir to a male holder of the barony. The claim of Anne, Countess of Dorset, to the Barony of Clifford was unsuccessfully prosecuted for nearly 60 years (i 606-1 663); yet William Cecil (who had been proclaimed Lord Ros in 1 591, as stated above) claimed and obtained the Barony of Ros in 1 61 6. It is true that from the year 1628 the Clifford case became complicated by various circumstances, which we deal with in detail later, but up to that year the two cases had much in common. The initial difficulty in both was that an earldom was supposed to " attract " and carry with it a barony in fee. Anne was unable to prevail against the Earl ot Cumberland, the heir male, who assumed the Barony of Clifford; but when the Earl of Rutland claimed the Barony of Ros, alleging that when Thomas, Lord Ros, was created Earl of Rutland, 17 Hen. VIII, the barony " became (») Collins, p. 256. (•>) Lordi' Journah, vol. xi, p. 13*. J. H. Round claims to have^^been the first person to draw attention to this case. See Peerage and Pedigree, vol. i, p. 219. (') Collins, p. 287. 89