BARON

baron, michel (1653-1729), french actor (whose family name originally was boyron), was born in paris, the son of a leading actor (d. 1655) and of a talented actress (d. 1662). at the age of twelve he joined the company of children known as the _petits comediens dauphins_, of which he was the brightest star. moliere was delighted with his talent, and with the king's permission secured him for his own company. in consequence of a misunderstanding with moliere's wife, the actor withdrew from the dramatist's company, but rejoined it in 1670, reappearing as domitien in corneille's _tite et berenice_, and in his _psyche_. he remained in this company until moliere's death. he then became a member of the company at the hotel de bourgogne, and from this time until his retirement in 1691 was undisputed master of the french stage, creating many of the leading roles in racine's tragedies, besides those in two of his own comedies, _l'homme a bonnes fortunes_ (1686), and _la coquette_ (1687). he also wrote _les enlevements_ (1685), _le debauche_ (1689), and translated and acted two plays of terence. in 1720 baron reappeared at the palais royal, and his activity on the stage was renewed in a multitude of parts. he died on the 22nd of december 1729. his son etienne michel baron (1676-1711) was also a fine actor, and left a son and two daughters who all played at the comedie francaise. see george monval, _un comedien amateur d'art_ (1893); also the abbe d'allamial's _lettres a mylord xxx. sur baron et la demoiselle lecouvreur_, in f. g. j. s. andrieux's _collection des memoires sur l'art dramatique_ (1822). baron. this word, of uncertain origin, was introduced into england at the conquest to denote "the man" (_i.e._ one who had done him "homage") of a great lord, and more especially of the king. all who held "in chief" (_i.e._ directly) of the king were alike _barones regis_, bound to perform a stipulated service, and members, in theory at least, of his council. great nobles, whether earls or not, also spoke of their tenants as "barons," where lesser magnates spoke of their "men" (_homines_). this was especially the case in earldoms of a palatine character, such as chester, where the earl's barons were a well-recognized body, the venables family, "barons of kinderton," continuing in existence down to 1679. in the palatinate of durham also, the bishop had his barons, among whom the hiltons of hilton castle were usually styled "barons of hilton" till extinct in 1746. other families to whom the title was accorded, independently of peerage dignity and on somewhat uncertain grounds, were "the barons of greystock," "the barons of stafford," and the cornwalls, "barons of burford." fantosme makes henry ii. speak of "mes baruns de lundres"; john's charter granting permission to elect a mayor speaks of "our barons of our city of london," and a london document even speaks of "the greater barons of the city." the aldermen seem to have been loosely deemed equivalent to barons and were actually assessed to the poll-tax as such under richard ii. in ireland the palatine character of the great lordships made the title not uncommon (_e.g._ the barons of galtrim, the barons of slane, the barons of the naas). as all those who held direct of the crown by military service (for those who held "by serjeanty" appear to have been classed apart), from earls downwards, were alike "barons," the great difference in their position and importance must have led, from an early date, to their being roughly divided into "greater" and "lesser" barons, and indeed, under henry ii., the _dialogus de scaccario_ already distinguishes their holdings as "greater" or "lesser" baronies. within a century of the conquest, as we learn from becket's case (1164), there arose the practice of sending to the greater barons a special summons to the council, while the lesser barons, it is stipulated in magna carta (1215), were to be summoned only through the sheriffs. thus was introduced a definite distinction, which eventually had the effect of restricting to the greater barons the rights and privileges of peerage. thus far the baron's position was connected with the tenure of land; in theory the barons were those who held their lands of the king; in practice, they were those who so held a large amount of land. the great change in their status was effected when their presence in that council of the realm which became the house of lords was determined by the issue of a writ of summons, dependent not on the tenure of land, but only on the king's will. camden's statement that this change was made by henry iii. after "the barons' war" was long and widely accepted, but it is now assigned, as by stubbs, to edward i., and the earliest writs accepted as creating hereditary baronies are those issued in his reign. it must not, however, be supposed that those who received such summons were as yet distinguished from commoners by any style or title. the only possible prefix at that time was _dominus_ (lord), which was regularly used by simple knights, and writs of summons were still issued to the lowest order of peers as knights (_chevaliers_) only. the style of baron was first introduced by richard ii. in 1387, when he created john de beauchamp, by patent, lord de beauchamp and baron of kidderminster, to make him "unum parium et baronum regni nostri." but it was not till 1433 that the next "baron" was created, sir john cornwall being then made baron of fanhope. in spite, however, of these innovations, the former [v.03 p.0422] was only summoned to parliament by the style of "john beauchamp of kidderminster," and the latter by that of "john cornwall, knight." such creations became common under henry vi., a transition period in peerage styles, but "baron" could not evict "sire," "chevalier" and "dominus." patents of creation contained the formula "lord a. (and) baron of b.," but the grantee still styled himself "lord" only, and it is an historically interesting fact that to this day a baron is addressed in correspondence, not by that style, but as "the lord a.," although all peers under the rank of duke are spoken of as "lords," while they are addressed in correspondence by their proper styles. to speak of "baron a." or "baron b." is an unhistorical and quite recent practice. when a barony, however, is vested in a lady it is now the recognized custom to speak of her as baroness, _e.g._ baroness berkeley. the solemn investiture of barons created by patent was performed by the king himself, by enrobing the peer in the scarlet "robe of estate" during the reading of the patent, and this form continued till 13 jac. i., when the lawyers declared that the delivery of the letters patent without ceremony was sufficient. the letters patent express the limits of inheritance of the barony. the usual limit is to the grantee and heirs male of his body, occasionally, in default of male issue, to a collateral male relative (as in the case of lord brougham, 1860) or (as in the case of lord basset, 1797, and lord burton, 1897) to the heirs-male of a daughter, and occasionally (as in the case of lord nelson, 1801) to the heirs-male of a sister. sometimes also (as in the case of the barony of rayleigh, 1821) the dignity is bestowed upon a lady with remainder to the heirs-male of her body. the coronation robes of a baron are the same as those of an earl, except that he has only two rows of spots on each shoulder; and, in like manner, his parliamentary robes have but two guards of white fur, with rows of gold lace; but in other respects they are the same as those of other peers. king charles ii. granted to the barons a coronet, having six large pearls set at equal distances on the chaplet. a baron's cap is the same as a viscount's. his style is "right honourable"; and he is addressed by the king or queen, "right trusty and well-beloved." his children are by courtesy entitled to the prefix "the honourable." _barons of the exchequer_ were formerly six judges (a chief baron and five puisne barons) to whom the administration of justice was committed in causes betwixt the king and his subjects relative to matters of revenue. selden, in his _titles of honour_, conjectures that they were originally chosen from among the barons of the kingdom, and hence their name; but it would probably be more exact to say that they were officers of a branch of the king's _curia_, which was theoretically composed of his "barons." the title has become obsolete since 1875, when the court of exchequer was merged in the high court of judicature. _barons of the cinque ports_ (originally hastings, dover, hythe, romney and sandwich) were at first the whole body of their freemen, who were so spoken of in royal charters. but the style was afterwards restricted to their mayors, jurats, and (prior to 1831) members of the house of commons elected by the cinque ports, two for each port. their right to the title is recognized in many old statutes, but in 1606 the use of the term in a message from the lower house drew forth a protest from the peers, that "they would never acknowledge any man that sitteth in the lower house to the right or title of a baron of parliament" (_lords' journals_). it was the ancient privilege of these "barons" to bear a canopy over the sovereign at his or her coronation and retain it as their perquisite. they petitioned as "barons of the cinque ports" to attend the coronation of edward vii., and a deputation was allowed to do so. _baron and feme_, in english law, is a phrase used for husband and wife, in relation to each other, who are accounted as one person. hence, by the old law of evidence, the one party was excluded from giving evidence for or against the other in civil questions, and a relic of this is still preserved in the criminal law. _baron and feme_, in heraldry, is the term used when the coats-of-arms of a man and his wife are borne per pale in the same escutcheon, the man's being always on the dexter side, and the woman's on the sinister. but in this case the woman is supposed not to be an heiress, for then her coat must be borne by the husband on an escutcheon of pretence. (see heraldry.) the foreign title of baron is occasionally borne by english subjects, but confers no precedence in the united kingdom. it may be russian, _e.g._ baron dimsdale (1762); german, _e.g._ baron stockmar, baron halkett (hanoverian); austrian, _e.g._ baron rothschild (1822), baron de worms; italian, _e.g._ baron heath; french, _e.g._ baron de teissier; french-canadian, _e.g._ baron de longueil (1700); dutch, _e.g._ baron mackay (lord reay). (j. h. r.) _the foreign title._--on the continent of europe the title baron, though the same in its origin, has come, owing to a variety of causes, to imply a rank and status very different from its connotation in the united kingdom, and again varies considerably in different countries. originally _baro_ meant no more than "man," and is so used in the salic and other "barbarian" laws; _e.g._ _si quis mortaudit barum vel feminam_, &c. (_lex aleman._ tit. 76). in this way, too, it was long preserved in the sense of "husband," as in the assize of jerusalem (mss. cap. 98): _si l'on appelle aucune chose femme qui aura baron, et il la veut deffendre, il la peut deffendre de son cors_, &c. gradually the word seems to have come to mean a "strong or powerful man," and thus generally "a magnate." finally, in france in the 12th century the general expression _barones_ was introduced in a restricted sense, as applied properly to all lords possessing an important fief, subject to the rule of primogeniture and thus not liable to be divided up, and held of one overlord alone. sometimes it included ecclesiastical lordships of the first rank. in the 13th century the register of king philip augustus places the _barones regis francie_ next to the dukes and counts holding in chief, the title being limited to vassals of the second rank. towards the end of the century the title had come to mean that its bearer held his principal fief direct from the crown, and was therefore more important than that of count, since many counts were only mediate vassals. thus the kings in granting a duchy or countship as an apanage to their brothers or sons used the phrase _in comitatum et baroniam_. from this period, however, the title tends to sink in comparative importance. when, in the 14th century, the feudal hierarchy was completed and stereotyped, the barons are ranked not only below counts, but below viscounts, though in power and possessions many barons were superior to many counts. in any case, until the 17th century, the title of baron could only be borne by the holder of a territorial barony; and it was louis xiv. who first cheapened the title in france by creating numerous barons by royal letters. this entire dissociation of the title from the idea of feudal rights and obligations was completed by napoleon's decree of march 1, 1808, reviving the ancient titles. by this instrument the title of baron was to be borne _ex officio_ by a number of high officials, _e.g._ ministers, senators, councillors of state, archbishops and bishops. it was given to the 37 mayors who attended the coronation, and could be claimed by any mayor who had served to the emperor's satisfaction for ten years, and by any member of an electoral college who had attended three sessions. the title was made to descend in order of primogeniture to legitimate or adopted sons and to the nephews of bishops, the sole condition being that proof must be presented of an actual income of 15,000 fr., of which one-third should descend with the title. the creation of barons was continued by louis xviii., charles x. and louis philippe, and, suspended at the revolution of 1848, was revived again on a generous scale by napoleon iii. the tolerant attitude of the third republic towards titles, which it does not officially recognize, has increased the confusion by facilitating the assumption of the title on very slender grounds of right. the result has been that in france the title of baron, unless borne by the recognized representative of a historic name, not only involves no political status, but confers also but very slight social distinction. the same is true, _mutatis mutandis_, of most other european countries, and notably of italy. in austria and germany the [v.03 p.0423] case is somewhat different. though in latin documents of the middle ages the term _barones_ for _liberi domini_ was used, it was not until the 17th century that the word _baron_, perhaps under the influence of the court of versailles, began to be used as the equivalent of the old german _freiherr_, or free lord of the empire. the style _freiherr_ (_liber dominus_) implied originally a dynastic status, and many _freiherren_ held countships without taking the title of count. when the more important of them styled themselves counts, the _freiherren_ sank into an inferior class of nobility. the practice of conferring the title _freiherr_ by imperial letters was begun in the 16th century by charles v., was assumed on the ground of special imperial concessions by many of the princes of the empire, and is now exercised by all the german sovereigns. though the practice of all the children taking the title of their father has tended to make that of baron comparatively very common, and has dissociated it from all idea of territorial possession, it still implies considerable social status and privilege in countries where a sharp line is drawn between the caste of "nobles" and the common herd, whom no wealth or intellectual eminence can place on the same social level with the poorest _adeliger_. in japan the title baron (_dan_) is the lowest of the five titles of nobility introduced in 1885, on the european model. it was given to the least important class of territorial nobles, but is also bestowed as a title of honour without reference to territorial possession. see du cange, _glossarium_, s. "baro" (ed. niort, 1883); john selden, _titles of honor_, p. 353 (ed. 1672); achille luchaire, _manuel des institutions francaises_ (paris, 1892); maurice prou, art. "baron" in _la grande encyclopedie_. (w. a. p.) baronet. although the origin of this title has been the subject of learned speculation, it is not known for certain why it was selected as that of "a new dignitie between barons and knights" created by james i. the object of its institution was to raise money for the crown, as was also done by the sale of peerage dignities under this sovereign. but the money was professedly devoted to the support of troops in ulster, that is, each grantee was to be liable for the pay of thirty men, at 8d. a day for three years. this amounted to l1095, which was the sum paid for the honour. when it was instituted, in may 1611, the king, to keep the baronetage select, covenanted that he would not create more than two hundred, and that only those who had l1000 a year in landed estate and whose paternal grandfathers had borne arms should receive the honour. but these qualifications were before long abandoned. as an inducement to apply for it, it was made to confer the prefix of "sir" and "lady" (or "dame"), and was assigned precedence above knights, though below the younger sons of barons. eight years later (30th of september 1619), the baronetage of ireland was instituted, the king pledging himself not to create more than a hundred baronets. meanwhile, questions had arisen as to the exact precedence of the baronets, and james by royal decree (28th of may 1612) had announced that it was his intention to rank them below the younger sons of barons. as this had the effect of stopping applications for the honour, james issued a fresh commission (18th of november 1614) to encourage them, and finally, as "the kinges wants might be much relieved out of the vanities and ambition of the gentrie" (in chamberlain's words), he granted, in 1616, the further privilege that the heirs apparent of baronets should be knighted on coming of age. the baronetage of nova scotia was devised in 1624 as a means of promoting the "plantation" of that province, and james announced his intention of creating a hundred baronets, each of whom was to support six colonists for two years (or pay 2000 marks in lieu thereof) and also to pay 1000 marks to sir william alexander (afterwards earl of stirling), to whom the province had been granted by charter in 1621. for this he was to receive a "free barony" of 16,000 acres in nova scotia, and to become a baronet of "his hienes kingdom of scotland." james dying at this point, charles i. carried out the scheme, creating the first scottish baronet on the 28th of may 1625, covenanting in the creation charter that the baronets "of scotland or of nova scotia" should never exceed a hundred and fifty in number, that their heirs apparent should be knighted on coming of age, and that no one should receive the honour who had not fulfilled the conditions, viz. paid 3000 marks (l166, 13s. 4d.) towards the plantation of the colony. four years later (17th of november 1629) the king wrote to "the contractors for baronets," recognizing that they had advanced large sums to sir william alexander for the plantation on the security of the payments to be made by future baronets, and empowering them to offer a further inducement to applicants; and on the same day he granted to all nova scotia baronets the right to wear about their necks, suspended by an orange tawny ribbon, a badge bearing an azure saltire with a crowned inescutcheon of the arms of scotland and the motto "fax mentis honestae gloria." as the required number, however, could not be completed, charles announced in 1633 that english and irish gentlemen might receive the honour, and in 1634 they began to do so. yet even so, he was only able to create a few more than a hundred and twenty in all. in 1638 the creation ceased to carry with it the grant of lands in nova scotia, and on the union with england (1707) the scottish creations ceased, english and scotsmen alike receiving thenceforth baronetcies of great britain. it is a matter of dispute whether james i. had kept faith with the baronets of england as to limiting their number; but his son soon rejected the restriction freely. creations became one of his devices for raising money; blank patents were hawked about, and in 1641 nicholas wrote that baronetcies were to be had for l400 or even for l350; a patent was offered about this time to mr wrottesley of wrottesley for l300. on the other hand, the honour appears to have been bestowed for nothing on some ardent royalists when the great struggle began. cromwell created a few baronets, but at the restoration the honour was bestowed so lavishly that a letter to sir richard leveson (3rd of june 1660) describes it as "too common," and offers to procure it for any one in return for l300 or l400. sir william wiseman, however, is said to have given l500. the history of the baronetage was uneventful till 1783, when in consequence of the wrongful assumption of baronetcies, an old and then increasing evil, a royal warrant was issued (6th of december) directing that no one should be recognized as a baronet in official documents till he had proved his right to the dignity, and also that those created in future must register their arms and pedigree at the heralds' college. in consequence of the opposition of the baronets themselves, the first of these two regulations was rescinded and the evil remained unabated. since the union with ireland (1800) baronets have been created, not as of great britain or of ireland, but as of the united kingdom. in 1834 a movement was initiated by mr richard broun (whose father had assumed a nova scotia baronetcy some years before), to obtain certain privileges for the order, but on the advice of the heralds' college, the request was refused. a further petition, for permission to all baronets to wear a badge, as did those of nova scotia, met with the same fate in 1836. meanwhile george iv. had revoked (19th of december 1827), as to all future creations the right of baronets' eldest sons to claim knighthood. mr broun claimed it as an heir apparent in 1836, and on finally meeting with refusal, publicly assumed the honour in 1842, a foolish and futile act. in 1854 sir j. kingston james was knighted as a baronet's son, and sir ludlow cotter similarly in 1874, on his coming of age; but when sir claude de crespigny's son applied for the honour (17th of may 1895), his application was refused, on the ground that the lord chancellor did not consider the clause in the patent (1805) valid. the reason for this decision appears to be unknown. mr broun's subsequent connexion with a scheme for reviving the territorial claims of the nova scotia baronets as part of a colonizing scheme need not be discussed here. a fresh agitation was aroused in 1897 by an order giving the sons of life peers precedence over baronets, some of whom formed themselves, in 1898, into "the honourable society of the baronetage" for the maintenance of its privileges. but a royal warrant was issued on the 15th of august 1898, confirming the precedence complained of as an infringement of their rights. the above body, however, [v.03 p.0424] has continued in existence as the "standing council of the baronetage," and succeeded in obtaining invitations for some representatives of the order to the coronation of king edward vii. it has been sought to obtain badges or other distinctions for baronets and also to purge the order of wrongful assumptions, an evil to which the baronetage of nova scotia is peculiarly exposed, owing to the dignity being descendible to collateral heirs male of the grantee as well as to those of his body. a departmental committee at the home office was appointed in 1906 to consider the question of such assumptions and the best means of stopping them. all baronets are entitled to display in their coat of arms, either on a canton or on an inescutcheon, the red hand of ulster, save those of nova scotia, who display, instead of it, the saltire of that province. the precedency of baronets of nova scotia and of ireland in relation to those of england was left undetermined by the acts of union, and appears to be still a moot point with heralds. the premier baronet of england is sir hickman bacon, whose ancestor was the first to receive the honour in 1611. see pixley's _history of the baronetage_; playfair's "baronetage" (in _british family antiquity_, vols. vi.-ix.); foster's _baronetage_; g. e. cokayne's _complete baronetage_; nichols, "the dignity of baronet" (in _herald and genealogist_, vol. iii.) (j. h. r.)