William Payne - "Lord" is an incorrect title

William Payne was not "Lord William Payne". The title "Lord" is generally reserved for the peerage, of which he does not seem to have been a member. Nor, apparently, was his father a peer. And even if his father *had* been a peer, in the British peerage system of primogeniture, a father's title passes to his eldest son, which William was not.

Being "lord of the manor" is quite different from being a peer; it's more like being "chairman of the board" today, and ones display name on Geni wouldn't be "Chairman John Doe". Essentially what the "lordship of the manor" consisted of was the responsibility of settling local disputes, keeping a security force ready for use (often times such would be commandeered by a regional peer), etc. Lordships of the manor were not separable from that property, and if the property was sold, the lordship of it would likewise pass to the new owner. This is what happened in 1621 or 22, when William sold the manor to Sir Daniel de Ligne, who then became "lord of the manor" in question.

I hope this clears up the confusion. It's an easy mistake for many people today to make.