An History of Birmingham (1783) Part 18

WILLIAM,

1130,

Like his unfortunate father, was in a state of va.s.salage. The male line of the Fitz-Ausculfs soon became extinct, and Gervase Paganell marrying the heiress, became Baron of Dudley-castle.

PETER DE BIRMINGHAM,

1154.

It is common in every cla.s.s of life, for the inferior to imitate the superior: If the real lady claims a head-dress sixteen inches high, that of the imaginary lady will immediately begin to thrive. The family, or surname, entered with William the First, and was soon the reigning taste of the day: A person was thought of no consequence without a surname, and even the depressed English, crept into the fashion, in imitation of their masters. I have already mentioned the Earl of Warwick, father of a numerous race now in Birmingham; whose name before the conquest was simply Turchill, but after, Turchill de Arden, (Matter of the Woods) from his own estate.

Thus the family of whom I speak, chose to dignify themselves with the name of _de Birmingham_.

Peter wisely consulted his own interest, kept fair with Paga.n.a.ll his Lord, and obtained from him, in 1166, nine Knight's-fees, which he held by military service.

A Knight's-fee, though uncommon now, was a word well understood 600 years ago. It did not mean, as some have imagined, fifteen pounds per annum, nor any determinate sum; but as much land as would support a gentleman. This Peter was fewer to Paga.n.a.ll, (waited at his table) though a man of great property.

The splendor in which the great Barons of that age lived, was little inferior to royalty.

The party distinctions also of Saxon and Norman, in the twelfth century, began to die away, as the people became united by interest or marriage, like that of Whig and Tory, in the eighteenth. And perhaps there is not at present a native that does not carry in his veins the blood of the four nations that were grafted upon the Britons.

Peter himself lived in affluence at his castle, then near Birmingham, now the Moat, of which in the next section. He also obtained from Henry the Second, as well as from Paga.n.a.ll the Lord paramount, several valuable privileges for his favourite inheritance of Birmingham. He bore for his arms, _azure, a bend lozenge_, of five points, _or_; the coat of his ancestors.

WILLIAM DE BIRMINGHAM,

1216.

At the reduction of Ireland, in the reign of Henry the Second, a branch of this family, and perhaps uncle to William, was very instrumental under Richard Strongbow, Earl of Pembroke, in accomplishing that great end; for which he was rewarded with a large estate, and the t.i.tle of Earl of Lowth, both which continue in his family. Perhaps they are the only remains of this honorable house.

WILLIAM DE BIRMINGHAM,

1246.

By this time, the male line of the Paga.n.a.lls was worn out, and Roger de Someri marrying the heiress, became Baron of Dudley, with all its dependencies; but Someri and Birmingham did not keep peace, as their fathers had done. William, being very rich, forgot to ride to Dudley every three weeks, to perform suit and service at Someri's court.

Whereupon a contest commenced to enforce the performance. But, in 1262, it was agreed between the contending parties--That William should attend the Lord's court only twice a year, Easter and Michaelmas, and at such other times, as the Lord chose to command by special summons. This William, having married the daughter of Thomas de Astley, a man of great eminence, and both joining with the Barons under Simon Mountfort, Earl of Leicester, against Henry the Third, William fell, in 1265, at the battle of Evesham; and as the loser is ever the rebel, the Barons were prescribed, and their estates confiscated.

The manor of Birmingham, therefore, valued at forty pounds per annum, was seized by the King, and given to his favorite, Roger de Clifford.

WILLIAM DE BIRMINGHAM,

1265.

By a law called the statute of Kenilworth, every man who had forfeited his estate to the crown, by having taken up arms, had liberty to redeem his lands, by a certain fine: William therefore paid that fine, and recovered the inheritance of his family. He also, in 1283 strengthened his t.i.tle by a charter from Edward the First, and likewise to the other manors he possessed, such as Stockton, in the County of Worcester; Shetford, in Oxfordshire; Maidencoat, in Berkshire; Hoggeston, in the county of Bucks; and Christleton, in Cheshire.

In 1285, Edward brought his writ of quo warranto, whereby every holder of land was obliged to show by what t.i.tle he held it. The consequence would have been dreadful to a Prince of less prudence than Edward. Some showed great unwillingness; for a dormant t.i.tle will not always bear examination--But William producing divers charters, clearly proved his right to every manorial privilege, such as market, toll, tem, sack, sok, insangenthief, weyfs, gallows, court-leet, and pillory, with a right to fix the standard for bread and beer; all which were allowed.

William, Lord of Birmingham, being a military tenant, was obliged to attend the King into Gascoigne, 1297, where he lost his liberty at the siege of Bellgard, and was carried prisoner in triumph to Paris.

WILLIAM DE BIRMINGHAM,

1306.

This is the man who tried the right of tollage with the people of Bromsgrove and King's norton.

WILLIAM DE BIRMINGHAM,

LORD BIRMINGHAM.

1316.

Was knighted in 1325; well affected to Edward the Second, for whose service he raised four hundred foot. Time seems to have put a period to the family of Someri, Lords of Dudley, as well as to those of their predecessors, the Paga.n.a.lls, and the Fitz-Ausculfs.

In 1327, the first of Edward the Third, Sir William was summoned to Parliament, by the t.i.tle of William Lord Birmingham, but not after.

It was not the fashion of that day to fill the House of Peers by patent.

The greater Barons held a local t.i.tle from their Baronies; the possessor of one of these, claimed a seat among the Lords.

I think, they are now all extinct, except Arundel, the property of the Norfolk family, and whoever is proprietor of Arundel castle, is Earl thereof by ancient prescription.

The lesser Barons were called up to the House by writ, which did not confer an hereditary t.i.tle. Of this cla.s.s was the Lord of Birmingham.

Hugh Spencer, the favourite of the weak Edward the Second, had procured the custody of Dudley-castle, with all its appendages, for his friend William, Lord Birmingham.

Thus the family who had travelled from Birmingham to Dudley every three weeks, to perform humble suit at the Lord's court, held that very court by royal appointment, to receive the fealty of others.

By the patent which const.i.tuted William keeper of Dudley-castle, he was obliged to account for the annual profits arising from that vast estate into the King's exchequer. When, therefore, in 1334, he delivered in his accounts, the Barons refused to admit them, because the money was defective. But he had interest enough with the crown to cause a mandamus to be issued, commanding the Barons to admit them.

SIR FOUK DE BIRMINGHAM,

1340.