{"id":13948,"date":"2024-09-10T08:30:00","date_gmt":"2024-09-10T07:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/?p=13948"},"modified":"2024-09-24T10:48:57","modified_gmt":"2024-09-24T09:48:57","slug":"de-la-warr-peerage-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2024\/09\/10\/de-la-warr-peerage-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Poison and the Tudor nobility: the De La Warr peerage case"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

With House of Lords membership once again on the political agenda, Dr Ben Coates<\/a> of our Lords 1558-1603 section<\/a> explores how one aristocratic family\u2019s murderous internal struggles played out in Parliament in the sixteenth century…<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On 26 Feb. 1549 a private bill \u2018to dis[in]herit William West, [for] attempting to poison\u2019 his uncle Thomas West, 9th Lord De La Warr, received a first reading in the House of Lords. The De La Warr estates were entailed on the male line and, as the 9th Lord had no children, his heirs were his half-brother, Sir Owen West, who had no sons, and then William West, the son of his next half-brother Sir George West. It was also assumed that William would inherit the De La Warr barony, although the peerage was a barony by writ and consequently not tied to the heirs male (indeed it had passed to the West family in the fifteenth century through the female line).<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Painted<\/a>
Unknown artist, Portrait of a Gentleman, probably of the West Family<\/a><\/em>[traditionally called William West], c.1545\u2013601545\u201360. \u00a9Tate. (Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 DEED)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Sir George West had died in 1538, when William was still a child. De La Warr had then taken his nephew \u2018into his keeping and service \u2026 tendering him as his natural son to his great cost\u2019, employing him to serve him at his table. However, the baron alleged that, on reaching the age of 18, William had grown impatient of waiting for his inheritance and plotted to kill his uncle, though in the first instance this would have benefited Sir Owen, who survived until 1551. William procured poison, which he mixed with the drink he was to serve to De La Warr. However, one of the other servants, \u2018perceiving certain powder about the brim of the \u2026 cup otherwise than was accustomed\u2019, alerted the 9th Lord who, \u2018having suspicion thereof and of nature somewhat abhorring the same, refrained to drink thereof\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

William was imprisoned in the Tower of London and evidently signed a confession. Surprisingly however, attempted murder was not in itself a felony at this date, and consequently De La Warr decided to proceed against his nephew via private legislation. The bill passed rapidly through the upper House, but, for reasons unknown, the Commons redrafted it. The new bill was given a first reading on 14 Mar. 1549, but proceeded no further because the session ended that same day. De La Warr tried again when a new session began in the following November; once more his bill quickly passed the Lords, but the Commons again insisted on redrafting it. Moreover, the lower House wanted to hear William\u2019s side of the story. Consequently he was brought from the Tower on 23 Jan. 1550, when he insisted that he was not guilty and had only signed the confession out of fear. However, three witnesses (possibly servants of De La Warr) testified against him. This appears to have convinced the Commons of his guilt and they passed the bill, which was duly enacted. William was then released from the Tower the following June.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A<\/a>
Antony van den Wyngaerde, View of London – The Tower of London,
c. 1554-57.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The 1550 act did not break the entail. Instead it empowered De La Warr to appoint trustees to hold the estates during William\u2019s lifetime, after which they would pass to the next male heir. It also banned William himself from inheriting the barony, but without disbarring his heirs. Despite William\u2019s attempt to murder him, De La Warr felt bound to make provision \u2018towards the maintenance of\u2019 his nephew\u2019s \u2018living and degree\u2019. Consequently, when the baron made his will in 1554 he provided for William \u2018of my charity and nothing of his desert\u2019. He granted his nephew a \u00a3350 annuity and the use of three houses, two in Sussex and one in London. He also referred obscurely to William\u2019s other \u2018vices and evil demeanours\u2019 which, \u2018for that he is of my blood\u2019, he had \u2018passed over in silence\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

De La Warr died shortly after making his will, and William subsequently persuaded his uncle\u2019s trustees to surrender their interest to him. In February 1556 Mary I formally granted William possession of his uncle\u2019s lands, describing him as \u2018Lord La Warr\u2019. Nevertheless, he was not summoned to Parliament. The following summer, having been indicted for plotting against Mary, William tried to claim the privilege of a peer to be tried by his fellow noblemen. However, the heralds ruled that he was a commoner, not because of the 1550 act, but because, as a barony by writ, the De La Warr title had descended de jure<\/em> to the heir general, the 9th Lord\u2019s niece. William withdrew his claim in order to enter a \u2018not guilty\u2019 plea, but was convicted of treason regardless. He was pardoned in April 1557.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shortly after being pardoned, William crossed the Channel as part of the English forces sent by Mary to aid her husband, Philip II of Spain, against the French. William took the opportunity to present a petition to Philip containing \u2018such matter \u2026 as is neither true nor justifiable\u2019, which suggests that he had renewed his claim to the De La Warr peerage. He was imprisoned on his return to England, but released in March 1558. A year later, following the accession of Elizabeth I, William signed himself merely \u2018Wyllyam West\u2019, when he wrote to the secretary of state, Sir William Cecil<\/a>, lobbying for an act to reverse his conviction for treason. He was also described merely as William West in the subsequent statute, which was passed in 1563. However, this was presumably a legal necessity, as he had been convicted of treason as a commoner. Elsewhere William called himself De La Warr in the 1560s, indicating that he had not abandoned his claim to the peerage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The issue of William\u2019s status came to a head when he was appointed joint lord lieutenant of Sussex in November 1569, alongside Anthony Browne, 1st Viscount Montagu<\/a> and Thomas Sackville, 1st Lord Buckhurst<\/a>. In the commission William was named as a commoner and was ranked last; but if he had indeed inherited the De La Warr peerage (which dated back to 1299), he should have been placed above Buckhurst, whose barony had been created in 1567. Queen Elizabeth probably did not want her kinsman Buckhurst to be relegated to third place in the commission. The problem was solved in February 1570, when William was prevailed upon to accept the De La Warr title as a new creation, which positioned him below Buckhurst in the hierarchy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Following William\u2019s death in 1595 his son, Thomas West, 2nd Lord De La Warr<\/a>, claimed the precedence of the old De La Warr barony. This question was referred to the Lords in 1597, when the upper House found in his favour, a verdict which effectively set aside the rights of the heir general. The 1550 act was thereafter almost forgotten until it achieved contemporary relevance in the twentieth century. In 1955, Tony Benn<\/a> cited it as a precedent when he sought to introduce a bill enabling him to renounce the inheritance of the Stansgate peerage \u2013 and even facetiously offered to attempt to poison his father.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

BC<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further reading:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>Sessional Papers. Printed by Order of the House of Lords<\/em> (1955), iii. 31<\/a>-2<\/p>\n\n\n\n

K.J. Kesselring, Making Murder Public<\/em> (2019)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

L.O Pike, Constitutional Hist. of the House of Lords<\/em> (1894)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chronicle. of England … by Charles Wriothesley, II<\/em> ed. W.D. Hamilton (Camden Society new series xx)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

J. H. Round, Peerage and Pedigree<\/em> (1910)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

J. Adams, Tony Benn<\/em> (1992)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

With House of Lords membership once again on the political agenda, Dr Ben Coates of our Lords 1558-1603 section explores how one aristocratic family\u2019s murderous internal struggles played out in Parliament in the sixteenth century… On 26 Feb. 1549 a private bill \u2018to dis[in]herit William West, [for] attempting to poison\u2019 his uncle Thomas West, 9th Lord De La Warr, received a first reading in the … Continue reading Poison and the Tudor nobility: the De La Warr peerage case<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":255134481,"featured_media":13950,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"_wpas_customize_per_network":false},"categories":[720013330,103464271,362124,774275534],"tags":[774275400,35890,284412,774275462,390604782,774275437,1250182,774275486,874886],"class_list":["post-13948","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-first-elizabethan-age","category-16th-century-history","category-legal-history","category-tudor","tag-1st-lord-de-la-warr","tag-featured","tag-house-of-lords","tag-lord-lieutenant-of-sussex","tag-peerage-creations","tag-peerage-disputes","tag-tony-benn","tag-treason-convictions","tag-william-west"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/william_west_painting_original-002.jpg?fit=908%2C1536&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2QYNW-3CY","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":6536,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2021\/01\/21\/3rd-baron-de-la-warr\/","url_meta":{"origin":13948,"position":0},"title":"An English baron in early 17th century America: Thomas West, 3rd Baron De La Warr","author":"Ben Coates","date":"January 21, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"To mark Joe Biden\u2019s inauguration as the 46th president of the United States, Dr Ben Coates of our Lords 1558-1603 section explains the surprising connection between the state of Delaware and the English peerage... The new American president, Joseph Robinette Biden Jr., was born in Pennsylvania, but moved as a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "James I to Restoration"","block_context":{"text":"James I to Restoration","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/sections\/james-i-to-restoration\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/jamestown_settlement_fort_interior.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/jamestown_settlement_fort_interior.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/jamestown_settlement_fort_interior.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/jamestown_settlement_fort_interior.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/jamestown_settlement_fort_interior.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":899,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2015\/03\/19\/henry-4th-lord-willoughby-of-parham-an-accidental-life\/","url_meta":{"origin":13948,"position":1},"title":"Henry, 4th Lord Willoughby of Parham: an accidental life","author":"Paul Hunneyball","date":"March 19, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"In today's blogpost,\u00a0Dr Paul Hunneyball, Senior Research Fellow on the Lords 1603-1660 section, shares the story of the\u00a0mysterious 4th Lord Willoughby of Parham... The History of Parliament\u2019s biographical approach to studying the Lords and Commons frequently throws up unexpected personal details, sometimes in the least promising places. The surviving archive\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "James I to Restoration"","block_context":{"text":"James I to Restoration","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/sections\/james-i-to-restoration\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":11300,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2023\/06\/13\/lineage-of-members-of-the-house-of-lords\/","url_meta":{"origin":13948,"position":2},"title":"Who do they think they are? Lineage of members of the House of Lords","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"June 13, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"One thought he was descended from Adam, another that he was a Hapsburg prince. In this latest blog, Dr Robin Eagles, editor of the Lords 1660-1832 project, examines some of the more dramatic claims made by members of the House of Lords\u2026 Members of the House of Lords prided themselves\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Georgian Lords"","block_context":{"text":"Georgian Lords","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/sections\/georgian-lords\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/canvas-2.png?fit=1010%2C608&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/canvas-2.png?fit=1010%2C608&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/canvas-2.png?fit=1010%2C608&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/canvas-2.png?fit=1010%2C608&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":7475,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2021\/06\/03\/the-earl-of-aberdeen-and-the-scottish-peerage-by-election-of-1721\/","url_meta":{"origin":13948,"position":3},"title":"The Earl of Aberdeen and the Scottish Peerage By-election of 1721","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"June 3, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"With two by-elections to the Commons on the horizon, in the latest blog for the Georgian Lords, Dr Stuart Handley looks back on the by-election for a Scots representative peer to sit in the House of Lords that took place almost exactly 300 years ago. For once, both government and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "18th Century history"","block_context":{"text":"18th Century history","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/centuries\/18th-century-history\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/nts_had_79_92-001.jpg?fit=992%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/nts_had_79_92-001.jpg?fit=992%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/nts_had_79_92-001.jpg?fit=992%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/nts_had_79_92-001.jpg?fit=992%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":8798,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2022\/01\/25\/lord-griffin-convention-of-january-1689\/","url_meta":{"origin":13948,"position":4},"title":"Pretending to be a Peer? The unlikely Lord Griffin and the Convention of January 1689","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"January 25, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"In today's blog Dr Robin Eagles, editor of our Lords 1715-1790 project, looks into the case of Edward Griffin, a man raised to the peerage in December 1688. But, in the face of James II's decision to flee the country, was he actually allowed to sit in the Lords Chamber?\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Stuart"","block_context":{"text":"Stuart","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/periods\/stuart\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/re-lord-edward-griffin.jpg?fit=354%2C685&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":10734,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2023\/02\/02\/the-duke-of-newcastles-resignation-honours-list-of-1756\/","url_meta":{"origin":13948,"position":5},"title":"The Duke of Newcastle\u2019s \u201cresignation honours list\u201d of 1756","author":"stuart03630ebada","date":"February 2, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"In the latest blog for the Georgian Lords, Stuart Handley considers the duke of Newcastle's resignation honours list in 1756. #HistParl #twitterstorians","rel":"","context":"In "Georgian Lords"","block_context":{"text":"Georgian Lords","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/sections\/georgian-lords\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/pow_pow_2796-001.jpg?fit=947%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/pow_pow_2796-001.jpg?fit=947%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/pow_pow_2796-001.jpg?fit=947%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/pow_pow_2796-001.jpg?fit=947%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13948","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/255134481"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13948"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13948\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13968,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13948\/revisions\/13968"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13950"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13948"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13948"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13948"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}