232 BOTELER BARONY BY 4. William le Botiler,(^) of Wem and Oversley, WRIT. next br. and h., b. 11 June 1274. He had livery of his y „ brother's lands 8 Apr. 1296, and having served in the •^ ' wars with Scotland, was sum. to Pari. 10 Mar. (1307/8) I Edw. II to 10 Oct. (1325) 19 Edw. II, by writs directed fVillelmo le Botiller (or sometimes le Butiller) de Wemme^ whereby he may be held to have become LORD LE BOTILLER.C) He w., istly, before 1298, Beatrice, who was living in 1305-06. He m.^ 2ndly, before Feb. 13 15/6, Ela, da. and coh. of Roger of Herdeburgh. He d. 1334, before 14 Sep., date of writ for Inq. p. m., 8 Edw. III. His widow was living 5 July 1343, and d. s.p.m. II. 1334. 5. William le Botiler, de jure apparently Lord le Botiller, s. and h. by ist wife, b. 8 Sep. 1298, aged 36 at his father's death. He was never sum. to Pari. He m. Margaret, da. of Richard (Fitz Alan), Earl of Arundel, by Alasia, da. of Tommaso I, Marquis of Saluzzo, in Piedmont. He d. Dec. 1361. III. 1361. 6. William (le Botiler), Lord le Botiller, s. and h., aged 30 at his father's death. He was sum. to Pari. 23 Feb. (1367/8) 42 Edw. Ill, and 6 Apr. (1369) 43 Edw. III. He m., before July 1343, Elizabeth. He d. s.p.m.., 14 Aug. 1369. IV. 1369 7. Elizabeth, is'^ywri?, apparently, according to modern to doctrine. Baroness le Botiller, da. and h., aged 24 at 141 1. the death of her father. She m., istly, between 1369 and 1379, Robert de Ferrers (yr. s. of Robert, 2nd Lord Ferrers, by Agnes, da. of Humphrey (Bohun), Earl of Hereford), who, having possessed himself of her vast estates (which he entailed, on failure of the heirs of his body by her, on his own right heirs), was sum. to Parl.(') 28 Dec. (1375) 49 Edw. Ill to 20 Oct. (1379) 3 Ric. II, by writs directed Roberto de Ferrers de Wemme, whereby he is held to have become LORD LE BOTILLER.C^) He d. (1380-81) 4 Ric. II. His widow w., 2ndly, (') The name was assumed by his ancestor Ralph, who held the oflfice of Butler to Robert, Earl of Leicester, and seated himself at Oversley, co. Warwick, being founder of Alcester Priory in that county, in II40. C") See ante^ p. 230, note "d." ('^) There is proof in the Rolls of Pari, of his sitting. ('^) In strictness this writ would constitute a new Barony, as, to continue the old Barony, it should have run "Roberto de Ferrers de la Botiller de Wemme," — see ante, p. 212, note "d." G.E.C. To state, as is done in the text, that having received a writ directed Roberto dc Ferrers he is held to have become Lord le Botiller, appears to be rather like saying that d-o-g spells cat, but the Editor is in the old difficulty, referred to in the Preface, of attempting to reconcile historic fact with peerage law. To argue as to what title, or whether a new title, was conferred by the writ at a time when a writ created no title whatever, is to fight over shadows. Of course he was sum., not as modern doctrine would lay down, in right of his wife, but because he held the lands and stood in the
