APPENDIX H 699 Humphrey Stafford was summoned to Parliament from 26 July (1461) I Edw. IV to 28 Feb. (1462/3) 2 Edw. 1', by writs directed Humfrido Stafford de Suthwyk chivakr, by which summonses, according to modern legal doctrine, he acquired a barony heritable by heirs general. (*) On 24 Apr. 1464, as Humphrey Stafford, Knight, he was created by patent Baron of Stafford of Southwick in tail male.i^) Is it conceivable that if the sum- monses had given Humphrey a barony with the most extensive inheritability known to the law, he would have accepted a barony limited to the heirs male of his body.() This case absolutely disposes of the barony by writ theory up to the year 1464. How then are we to account for the assertions made in the Dacre and Lisle cases.' There is no doubt that at this time the writ of summons was regarded as conferring a dignified position rather than as imposing a burden, and that the privilege of a lord of parliament was valued — teste the claim of Reynold West to precedence already referred to. As a natural consequence families whose members had been summoned for several generations began to conceive that they had a prescriptive right to the continuance of the summons, and as they saw men being by patent created Lords with a heritable dignity they were doubtless anxious to preserve the seat in Parlia- ment which would keep them on an equality with these newcomers. This quite reasonable and innocent ambition must have given a great oppor- tunity for the activities of the heralds, who were naturally consulted on all questions affecting privilege and dignity. We may well believe that they scented good business in stimulating rivalry between those who had bean seated in the house from father to son and those who had just acquired a seat. They would naturally endeavour to obtain for their clients a more enduring title of honour than that which was being bestowed; and if they were no more scrupulous than the venial sycophants and forgers of documents who flourished in succeeding reigns, they had it in their power to influence very considerably the history of our peerage at this time. It is difficult to resist the conclusion that the untenable claims made in connection with peerages in Henry Vl's reign were promoted by those who subsisted mainly on the fees they extracted from the recipients of the King's favours. If this conjecture be correct, it would appear that a re- version to tenure and prescription was tried first. The success which had attended such a claim in the case of an earldom encouraged them to try with a barony, that of Lisle, in 1444. Demonstrably untrue as was the assertion of tenure on this occasion also, it apparently passed without challenge at the time. Another remarkable peerage event occurred four years later. In 1399 (*) He appears on the Parliament Roll as present in Parliament 4 Nov. 1 46 1. [Rot. Pari, vol. V, p. 461). C') Cal. Patent Rol/s, Edward IV, 1461-67. The patent is printed in Lords^ Rfports, vol. V, p. 363. See also particulars regarding the summonses to him and William Herbert and Walter Devereux, post, in Schedule. ('=) He died without surviving issue.
