Writ of Acceleration - Procedure

Procedure

A writ of acceleration was granted only if the title being accelerated was a subsidiary one, and not the main title, and if the beneficiary of the writ was the heir apparent of the actual holder of the title; thus the elder peer was always at least a viscount. The heir apparent was not always summoned in his courtesy title; rather, almost every person summoned to Parliament by virtue of a writ of acceleration was summoned in one of his father’s baronies. For example, William Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington, heir apparent of William Cavendish, 3rd Duke of Devonshire, was summoned as Baron Cavendish of Hardwick. It was not possible for heirs apparent of peers in the Peerage of Scotland and Peerage of Ireland to be given writs of acceleration after 1707 and 1801, respectively, as holders of titles in these peerages were not automatically guaranteed a seat in the British House of Lords.

An heir apparent receiving such a writ took the precedence within the House of Lords owing to the title accelerated. For example, when Viscount Cranborne was accelerated to the barony of Cecil (created 1603), he took precedence ahead of all barons in parliament created after that date.

If an accelerated baron dies before his father, the barony passes to his heirs if any (according to the remainder governing the creation of the barony), else to his father. For example, Charles Boyle, 3rd Viscount Dungarvan, the eldest surviving son of the Earl of Burlington, was summoned to Parliament in 1689 in his father's barony of Clifford of Lanesborough, but predeceased his father. His son, the first Earl's grandson, was granted a writ of attendance to the Lords in the barony.

Acceleration can affect the numbering of holders of peerages. Suppose the first Earl Z and Baron X has two sons, and that the first son receives the barony by acceleration and dies childless before his father. His brother will eventually become second Earl Z but third Baron X.