FITZ-nUGH — FITZ-JOHN. 365 with Edward IV. In 1468 he made a pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulchre. He m. Alice (sister of Richard, the celebrated Karl of Warwick and Salisbury), da. of Richard (Nbvill), Eaul of Salisbury, by Alice, da. and h. of Thomas (Montacute), also Earl of Salisbury. He d. 4 June 1472. VI. 1472. G. Riciiaiid (Fitz-Hdgh), Lord Fitz-Huou, only surv. s. and h., aged 15 years at the death of his father. He was sum. to Pari, as a Baron (») from 15 Nov. (1482) to 1 Sep. (1487), 3 Hen. VII. He was present at the coronation of Richard III, 15 July 1483,(») but was constituted by Henry VII, in 1486, Gov. of the Castles of Richmond, Middleham and Barnard Castle. Hem. Elizabeth, da. of Thomas (Buroh or Borough), 1st Lord Burgh de Gaynesboro, by Margaret, da. of Thomas (Uos), Lord de Ros. He d. about 1508. VII. 1508, 7. George (FiTz-Huan), Lord Fitz-Hugh, only s. and to h. had livery of his lands in 1509. He was sum. to Pari, as a 1512. Baron from 17 Oct. (1509), 1 Hen. VIII. to 28 Nov. (1511), 3 Hen. VIII. He d. s.p. (1512-13), 4 Heu. VIII., when the Barony fell into abeyance. ("). FITZ-JOHtf. JonN Fitz-Joux, who in 1258, was under age (tho' m. to Margery, da. of Philip Basset, the Chief Justicier, 1261-63), was sum. to [ilontfort's] Pari., 14th Dec. (1264), 49 Henry III. Such summons, however, does not originate a hereditary Barouy.( J ) He fought against the King at Evesham, 4 Aug. 1265, being almost the only person of note, on that side, who survived that buttle. He d., s.p., (1276), 4 Ed. I. ( a ) There is proof in the rolls of Pari, of his sitting. ( b ) Sec p. 8, note " b," sub "Dacre of the North," for a list of the Peers there present. (°) The coheirs were (1) his aunt, Alice, wife of Sir Thomas Fienes, and eldest da. of the 5th Lord. Her representative in 1S90 (thro' the families of Fiennes, Leu- nard, Roper and Brand) is the Viscount Hampden. (2) Sir Thomas Parr, s. and h. of Elizabeth, another da. of the said 5th Lord Fitz Hugh. Her representative in 1890 (thro' the families of Parr, Herbert, Windsor and Stuart) is the Marquess of Bute. ( d ) "The fust writ extant [of any summons to Par].] is that of the 49 Hen. III. [24 Dec 1264], but very little can be gathered from it, as it does not contain the names of one-third part of the Baronial body, and, though issued in the King's name, the King teas himself a prisoner to [Simon de Montfort] the Earl of Leicester, the leader of the rebellious Barons, who [i.e., which Earl] it may be fairly inferred, summoned only those Barons, who took part with him against the Royal cause " [Courthope, p. xxv, sub " Baronies by writ "]. In this writ the number of lay Peers summoned was but 23, of whom five (Leicester, Gloucester, Norfolk, Oxford and Derby) were Earls ; the remaining eighteen were as follows, viz. (1) Camoys; (2) St. John; (3) Le Despencer " Justic. Angl.;" (4) Fitz-John ; (5) Munchensi; (6) Seqrave; (7) Vkscy i (8) Basset de Drayton; (9) Hastings; (10) Lucy; (11) Ros; (12) D'Eyvili.e; (13) Newmaucu; (14) Colville; (15) Marmion; (16) Bertram; (17) Basset de Sapcote and (18) Gaunt. It was, however, held in 1877, by the House of Lords (in the decision on the claim to the Barony of Segrave) that no peerage can be considered as having been constituted by this writ, which was issued in rebellion. This, consequently establishes the icrit of 28 June 1283 (11 Ed. I.), as the earliest that can constitute a peerage Jlarony by writ, save, probably as to two (pre-judicatcd) 0:ises, viz., those of Le Despencer and de Ros, each of which had previously (one in 1604 and the other in 1806) been allowed as Baronies originating with the writ of 1264. See p. 90, note " c," sub " Despencer."
