themselves off from the Body; and so the objection of quilibet potest Juri suo renuntiare is easily answered.
'Twas further argued on the same side, That
1. Whether a Peerage is governable by the ordinary Rules of Law concerning Inheritances.—An Honour goes not according to the Rules of the Common Law, nor is it governable by them, it is not therefore pertinent to argue from those Rules which hold in Cases of other Inheritances; for a Dignity descends to the Half-blood; there is no Coparcenership of it, but the Eldest takes the whole; a Fee-simple will go to a Noble-man without the word (Heirs). 1 Inst. 27. It differs from Estates in Land in the Intrinsick Matter, as well as the Manner of the Limitation, because it is given for two Reasons, for Counsel and Defence; and it is a Civil Interest, appointed by the Civil Constitution of the Realm, which goes with the Blood, and is inherent in the Blood, insomuch that it is agreed on all Hands, that it can't be transferred to a Stranger; and till Nevil's Case, 'twas doubted whether forfeitable for Treason; if a Lord die, his Son shall be introduced without the Ceremony usual at the first Creation; a Peer's eldest Son, and all Minors, sit behind the Chair of State, to prepare them for the Sitting in the House as Members, and because they have some Title to the Honour they are called Nobiles Nati, for the first time they fetch breath they have Nobility in them: So that he, that Surrenders by Fine, must not only extinguish his Estate in the Honour, but also the Nobility of his Blood.
2. The Peers are interested in each other.—Every Lord is not only a Lord for himself, but also hath a Right of Peerage, and is a Peer of the Realm, and therefore a Peer for every one of the House, and therefore hath the Privilege to demand his Writ Ex debito Justitiæ, and is to be tried by his Peers in Capital Crimes; and that appears farther from a Matter which happened in this House, 16 Car. 2. There was an Order mentioning the Bishops to be Lords of Parliament, not Peers; at which the Lords wondering, ordered a Committee to examine the Reason of it; which proves that Lord is not so high nor inclusive as Peers: So that if the Fine have any Operation, it takes [3] away not only his Right, but also the Right of the House of Lords.
3. Peerage how triable—The Trial of Baron or no Baron upon Issue in any Court of Judicature is by the Records of Parliament; but if a Fine may be levied in the Common Pleas, the Trial is drawn ad aliud Examen, and must then be by the Records of that Court. The Clerk of the Parliament always certifies if he be a Baron, because he hath the Record before him; but he cannot certify he is no Baron, because he hath not the Record thereof before him.
4. Things Personal do not pass by Fine. Honours Feodary and Officiary.—No Fine can be levied of a thing Personal, as an Annuity to a Man and his (Heirs,) but a Dignity is a thing Personal; and so he took notice of the Difference betwixt the Honours of Peerage, which are Personal, and the Honours that are Feodary and Officiary, which have reference to an Office or Land.
5. Argumentum ad inconvenienti. Precedents answered.—He did argue ab inconvenienti, that this Opinion can be no Inconveniency to the Crown; but the contrary makes Nobility a mere Pageantry, by putting it into the Hands of a weak and angry Father, to dispossess an hopeful Son of that which is his Birthright: The Titles of Esquire and Gentleman are drowned in the greater Dignity of that of a Peer, and when the greater are gone, the other must go with it: And then from being a Nobleman today, he and the rest of his Family must be below all Nobility, and be called Yeoman or Goodman Villers tomorrow, which may bring great Confusion to a Noble Family and all its Relatives; and surely this House will not put such a publick Disrespect on such a Family, by agreeing to so unjust an Act of one Man. And that which was most relied upon, was a Resolution of this House in Stafford's Case Anno 1640, which no Man without Indecency can question; it passed not sub silentio or obiter, but upon Debate; neither could it be any way invalid upon Account of the Times, for it was in the Infancy of that Parliament, and that wherein a Peer's Case, who sits now in this House, was judicially before them; and therefore there is no reason to shake that Judgment more than any other Judgment of that Time. My Lord Coke in his 4 Inst. Chapt. of Ireland, is of Opinion that Honours cannot be extinguished but by Act
2
