Curialia Miscellanea, or Anecdotes of Old Times, Regal, Noble, Gentilitial, and Miscellaneous

The publication of this Volume is strictly conformable to the testamentary intentions of the Author, who consigned the MSS. for that express purpose to the present Editor[1].

Mr. Pegge had, in his life-time, published Three Portions of "Curialia, or an Account of some Members of the Royal Houshold;" and had, with great industry and laborious research, collected materials for several other Portions, some of which were nearly completed for the press.

Mr. Pegge was "led into the investigation," he says, "by a natural and kind of instinctive curiosity, and a desire of knowing what was the antient state of the Court to which he had the honour, by the favour of his Grace William the late Duke of Devonshire, to compose a part."

Two more Portions were printed in 1806 by the present Editor. Long, however, and intimately acquainted as he was with the accuracy and diffidence of Mr. Pegge, he would have hesitated in offering those posthumous Essays to the Publick, if the plan had not been clearly defined, and the Essays sufficiently distinct to be creditable to the reputation which Mr. Pegge had already acquired, by the Parts of the "Curialia" published by himself, and by his very entertaining (posthumous) "Anecdotes of the English Language;"—a reputation which descended to him by Hereditary Right, and which he transmitted untarnished to a worthy and learned Son.

It was the hope and intention of the Editor to have proceeded with some other Portions of the "Curialia;" but the fatal event which (in February 1808) overwhelmed him in accumulated distress put a stop to that intention. Nearly all the printed Copies of the "Curialia" perished in the flames; and part of the original MS. was lost.

A few detached Articles, which related to the College of Arms, and to the Order of Knights Bachelors (which, had they been more perfect, would have formed one or more succeeding Portions) have since been deposited in the rich Library of that excellent College.

The Volume now submitted to the candour of the Reader is formed from the wreck of the original materials. The arranging of the several detached articles, and the revisal of them through the press, have afforded the Editor some amusement; and he flatters himself that the Volume will meet with that indulgence which the particular circumstances attending it may presume to claim.—If the Work has any merit, it is the Author's. The defects should, in fairness, be attributed to the Editor.

J. N.

Highbury Place, Dec. 1, 1817.

⁂ Extract from Mr. Pegge's Will.

"Having the Copy-right of my little Work called Curialia in myself, I hereby give and bequeath all my interest therein, together with all my impressions thereof which may be unsold at the time of my decease, to my Friend Mr. John Nichols, Printer, with the addition of as much money as will pay the Tax on this Legacy. I also request of the said Mr. John Nichols, that he would carefully peruse and digest all my Papers and Collections on the above subject, and print them under the title of Curialia Miscellanea, or some such description.—There is also another Work of mine, not quite finished, intitled Anecdotes of the English Language, which I wish Mr. Nichols to bring forward from his Press. Samuel Pegge."

OR,

MEMOIRS OF THE REV. DR. PEGGE,

COMPILED BY HIS SON.

————

The Rev. Samuel Pegge, LL. D. and F.S.A. was the Representative of one of four Branches of the Family of that name in Derbyshire, derived from a common Ancestor, all which existed together till within a few years. The eldest became extinct by the death of Mr. William Pegge, of Yeldersley, near Ashborne, 1768; and another by that of the Rev. Nathaniel Pegge, M.A. Vicar of Packington, in Leicestershire, 1782.

The Doctor's immediate Predecessors, as may appear from the Heralds-office, were of Osmaston, near Ashborne, where they resided, in lineal succession, for four generations, antecedently to his Father and himself, and where they left a patrimonial inheritance, of which the Doctor died possessed[2].

Of the other existing branch, Mr. Edward Pegge having [1662] married Gertrude, sole daughter and heir of William Strelley, Esq. of Beauchief, in the Northern part of Derbyshire, seated himself there, and was appointed High Sheriff of the County in 1667; as was his Grandson, Strelley Pegge, Esq. 1739; and his Great-grandson, the present Peter Pegge, Esq. 1788.

It was by Katharine Pegge, a daughter of Thomas Pegge, Esq. of Yeldersley, that King Charles II. (who saw her abroad during his exile) had a son born (1647), whom he called Charles Fitz-Charles, to whom he granted the Royal arms, with a baton sinister, Vairé, and whom (1675) his Majesty created Earl of Plymouth, Viscount Totness, and Baron Dartmouth[3]. He was bred to the Sea, and, having been educated abroad, most probably in Spain, was known by the name of Don Carlos[4]. The Earl married the Lady Bridget Osborne, third Daughter of Thomas Earl of Danby, Lord High Treasurer (at Wimbledon, in Surrey), 1678[5], and died of a flux at the siege of Tangier, 1680, without issue. The body was brought to England, and interred in Westminster Abbey[6]. The Countess re-married Dr. Philip Bisse, Bishop of Hereford, by whom she had no issue; and who, surviving her, erected a handsome tablet to her memory in his Cathedral.

Katharine Pegge, the Earl's mother, married Sir Edward Greene, Bart. of Samford in Essex, and died without issue by him[7].

But to return to the Rev. Dr. Pegge, the outline only of whose life we propose to give. His Father (Christopher) was, as we have observed, of Osmaston, though he never resided there, even after he became possessed of it; for, being a younger Brother, it was thought proper to put him to business; and he served his time with a considerable woollen-draper at Derby, which line he followed till the death of his elder Brother (Humphry, who died without issue 1711) at Chesterfield in Derbyshire, when he commenced lead-merchant, then a lucrative branch of traffick there; and, having been for several years a Member of the Corporation, died in his third Mayoralty, 1723.

He had married Gertrude Stephenson (a daughter of Francis Stephenson, of Unston, near Chesterfield, Gent.) whose Mother was Gertrude Pegge, a Daughter of the before-mentioned Edward Pegge, Esq. of Beauchief; by which marriage these two Branches of the Family, which had long been diverging from each ether, became reunited, both by blood and name, in the person of Dr. Pegge, their only surviving child.

He was born Nov. 5, 1704, N.S. at Chesterfield, where he had his school education; and was admitted a Pensioner of St. John's College, Cambridge, May 30, 1722, under the tuition of the Rev. Dr. William Edmundson; was matriculated July 7; and, in the following November, was elected a Scholar of the House, upon Lupton's Foundation.

In the same year with his Father (1723) died the Heir of his Maternal Grandfather (Stephenson), a minor; by whose death a moiety of the real estate at Unston (before-mentioned) became the property of our young Collegian, who was then pursuing his academical studies with intention of taking orders.

Having, however, no immediate prospect of preferment, he looked up to a Fellowship of the College, after he had taken the degree of A.B. in January 1725, N.S.; and became a candidate upon a vacancy which happened favourably in that very year; for it was a Lay-fellowship upon the Beresford Foundation, and appropriated to the Founder's kin, or at least confined to a Native of Derbyshire.

The competitors were, Mr. Michael Burton (afterwards Dr. Burton), and another, whose name we do not find; but the contest lay between Mr. Burton and Mr. Pegge. Mr. Burton had the stronger claim, being indubitably related to the Founder; but, upon examination, was declared to be so very deficient in Literature, that his superior right, as Founder's kin, was set aside, on account of the insufficiency of his learning; and Mr. Pegge was admitted, and sworn Fellow March 21, 1726, O. S.

In consequence of this disappointment, Mr. Burton was obliged to take new ground, to enable him to procure an establishment in the world; and therefore artfully applied to the College for a testimonial, that he might receive orders, and undertake some cure in the vicinity of Cambridge. Being ordained, he turned the circumstance into a manœuvre, and took an unexpected advantage of it, by appealing to the Visitor [the Bishop of Ely, Dr. Thomas Greene], representing, that, as the College had, by the testimonial, thought him qualified for Ordination, it could not, in justice, deem him unworthy of becoming a Fellow of the Society, upon such forcible claims as Founder's kin, and also as a Native of Derbyshire.

These were irresistible pleas on the part of Mr. Burton; and the Visitor found himself reluctantly obliged to eject Mr. Pegge; when Mr. Burton took possession of the Fellowship, which he held many years[8].

Thus this business closed; but the Visitor did Mr. Pegge the favour to recommend him, in so particular a manner, to the Master and Seniors of the College, that he was thenceforward considered as an honorary member of the body of Fellows (tanquam Socius), kept his seat at their table and in the chapel, being placed in the situation of a Fellow-commoner.

In consequence, then, of this testimony of the Bishop of Ely's approbation, Mr. Pegge was chosen a Platt-fellow on the first vacancy, A. D. 1729[9]. He was therefore, in fact, twice a Fellow of St. John's.

There is good reason to believe that, in the interval between his removal from his first Fellowship, and his acceding to the second, he meditated the publication of Xenophon's "Cyropædia" and "Anabasis," from a collation of them with a Duport MS. in the Library at Eton—to convince the world that the Master and Seniors of St. John's College did not judge unworthily in giving him so decided a preference to Mr. Burton in their election.

It appears that he had made very large collections for such a work; but we suspect that it was thrown aside on being anticipated by Mr. Hutchinson's Edition, which was formed from more valuable manuscripts.

He possessed a MS "Lexicon Xenophonticum" by himself, as well as a Greek Lexicon in MS.; and had also "An English Historical Dictionary," in 6 volumes folio; a French and Italian, a Latin, a British and Saxon one, in one volume each; all corrected by his notes; a "Glossarium Generale;" and two volumes of "Collections in English History."

During his residence in Kent, Mr. Pegge formed a "Monasticon Cantianum," in two folio MS volumes; a MS Dictionary for Kent; an Alphabetical List of Kentish Authors and Worthies; Kentish Collections; Places in Kent; and many large MS additions to the account of that county in the "Magna Britannia."

He also collected a good deal relative to the College at Wye, and its neighbourhood, which he thought of publishing, and engraved the seal, before engraved in Lewis's Seals. He had "Extracts from the Rental of the Royal Manor of Wye, made about 1430, in the hands of Daniel Earl of Winchelsea;" and "Copy of a Survey and Rental of the College, in the possession of Sir Windham Knatchbull, 1739."

While resident in College (and in the year 1730) Mr. Pegge was elected a Member of the Zodiac Club, a literary Society, which consisted of twelve members, denominated from the Twelve Signs. This little institution was founded, and articles, in the nature of statutes, were agreed upon Dec. 10, 1725. Afterwards (1728) this Society thought proper to enlarge their body, when six select additional members were chosen, and denominated from six of the Planets, though it still went collectively under the name of the Zodiac Club[10]. In this latter class Mr. Pegge was the original Mars, and continued a member of the Club as long as he resided in the University. His secession was in April 1732, and his seat accordingly declared vacant.

In the same year, 1730, Mr. Pegge appears in a more public literary body;—among the Members of the Gentlemen's Society at Spalding, in Lincolnshire, to which he contributed some papers which will be noticed below[11].

Having taken the degree of A. M. in July 1729, Mr. Pegge was ordained Deacon in December in the same year; and, in the February following, received Priest's orders; both of which were conferred by Dr. William Baker, Bishop of Norwich.

It was natural that he should now look to employment in his profession; and, agreeably to his wishes, he was soon retained as Curate to the Rev. Dr. John Lynch (afterwards [1733] Dean of Canterbury), at Sundrich in Kent, on which charge he entered at Lady-day 1730; and in his Principal, as will appear, soon afterwards, very unexpectedly, found a Patron.

The Doctor gave Mr. Pegge the choice of three Cures under him—of Sundrich, of a London Living, or the Chaplainship of St. Cross, of which the Doctor was then Master. Mr. Pegge preferred Sundrich, which he held till Dr. Lynch exchanged, that Rectory for Bishopsbourne, and then removed thither at Midsummer 1731.

Within a few months after this period, Dr. Lynch, who had married a daughter of Archbishop Wake, obtained for Mr. Pegge, unsolicited, the Vicarage of Godmersham (cum Challock), into which he was inducted Dec. 6, 1731.

We have said unsolicited, because, at the moment when the Living was conferred, Mr. Pegge had more reason to expect a reproof from his Principal, than a reward for so short a service of these Cures. The case was, that Mr. Pegge had, in the course of the preceding summer (unknown to Dr. Lynch) taken a little tour, for a few months, to Leyden, with a Fellow Collegian (John Stubbing, M. B. then a medical pupil under Boerhaave), leaving his Curacy to the charge of some of the neighbouring Clergy. On his return, therefore, he was not a little surprized to obtain actual preferment through Dr. Lynch, without the most distant engagement on the score of the Doctor's interest with the Archbishop, or the smallest suggestion from Mr. Pegge.

Being now in possession of a Living, and independent property, Mr. Pegge married (April 13, 1732) Miss Anne Clarke, the only daughter of Benjamin, and sister of John Clarke, Esqrs. of Stanley, near Wakefield, in the county of York, by whom he had one Son [Samuel, of whom hereafter], who, after his Mother's death, became eventually heir to his Uncle; and one Daughter, Anna-Katharina, wife of the Rev. John Bourne, M.A. of Spital, near Chesterfield, Rector of Sutton cum Duckmanton, and Vicar of South Winfield, both in Derbyshire; by whom she had two daughters, Elizabeth, who married Robert Jennings, Esq. and Jane, who married Benjamin Thompson, Esq.

While Mr. Pegge was resident in Kent, where he continued twenty years, he made himself acceptable to every body, by his general knowledge, his agreeable conversation, and his vivacity; for he was received into the familiar acquaintance of the best Gentlemen's Families in East Kent, several of whom he preserved in his correspondence after he quitted the county, till the whole of those of his own standing gave way to fate before him.

Having an early propensity to the study of Antiquity among his general researches, and being allowedly an excellent Classical Scholar, he here laid the foundation of what in time became a considerable collection of books, and his little cabinet of Coins grew in proportion; by which two assemblages (so scarce among Country Gentlemen in general) he was qualified to pursue those collateral studies, without neglecting his parochial duties, to which he was always assiduously attentive.

The few pieces which Mr. Pegge printed while he lived in Kent will be mentioned hereafter, when we shall enumerate such of his Writings as are most material. These (exclusively of Mr. Urban's obligations to him in the Gentleman's Magazine) have appeared principally, and most conspicuously, in the Archæologia, which may be termed the Transactions of the Society of Antiquaries. In that valuable collection will be found more than fifty memoirs, written and communicated by him, many of which are of considerable length, being by much the greatest number hitherto contributed by any individual member of that respectable Society.

In returning to the order of time, we find that, in July 1746, Mr. Pegge had the great misfortune to lose his Wife; whose monumental inscription, at Godmersham, bears ample testimony of her worth:

"MDCCXLVI.
Anna Clarke, uxor Samuelis Pegge
Vicarii hujus parochiæ;
Mulier, si qua alia, sine dolo,
Vitam æternam et beatam fidenter hic sperat;
nec erit frustra."

This event entirely changed Mr. Pegge's destinations; for he now zealously meditated on some mode of removing himself, without disadvantage, into his Native County. To effect this, one of two points was to be carried; either to obtain some piece of preferment, tenable in its nature with his Kentish Vicarage; or to exchange the latter for an equivalent; in which last he eventually succeeded beyond his immediate expectations.

We are now come to a new epoch in the Doctor's life; but there is an interval of a few years to be accounted for, before he found an opportunity of effectually removing himself into Derbyshire.

His Wife being dead, his Children young and at school, and himself reduced to a life of solitude, so ungenial to his temper (though no man was better qualified to improve his leisure); he found relief by the kind offer of his valuable Friend, Sir Edward Dering, Bart.

At this moment Sir Edward chose to place his Son[12] under the care of a private Tutor at home, to qualify him more competently for the University. Sir Edward's personal knowledge of Mr. Pegge, added to the Family situation of the latter, mutually induced the former to offer, and the latter to accept, the proposal of removing from Godmersham to Surrenden (Sir Edward's mansion-house) to superintend Mr. Dering's education for a short time; in which capacity he continued about a year and a half, till Mr. Dering was admitted of St. John's College, Cambridge, in March 1751.

Sir Edward had no opportunity, by any patronage of his own, permanently to gratify Mr. Pegge, and to preserve him in the circle of their common Friends. On the other hand, finding Mr. Pegge's propensity to a removal so very strong, Sir Edward reluctantly pursued every possible measure to effect it.

The first vacant living in Derbyshire which offered itself was the Perpetual Curacy of Brampton, near Chesterfield; a situation peculiarly eligible in many respects. It became vacant in 1747; and, if it could have been obtained, would have placed Mr. Pegge in the centre of his early acquaintance in that County; and, being tenable with his Kentish living, would not have totally estranged him from his Friends in the South of England. The patronage of Brampton is in the Dean of Lincoln, which Dignity was then filled by the Rev. Dr. Thomas Cheyney; to whom, Mr. Pegge being a stranger, the application was necessarily to be made in a circuitous manner, and he was obliged to employ more than a double mediation before his name could be mentioned to the Dean.

The mode he proposed was through the influence of William the third Duke of Devonshire; to whom Mr. Pegge was personally known as a Derbyshire man (though he had so long resided in Kent), having always paid his respects to his Grace on the public days at Chatsworth, as often as opportunity served, when on a visit in Derbyshire. Mr. Pegge did not, however, think himself sufficiently in the Duke's favour to make a direct address for his Grace's recommendation to the Dean of Lincoln, though the object so fully met his wishes in moderation, and in every other point. He had, therefore, recourse to a friend, the Right Rev. Dr. Fletcher, Bishop of Dromore, then in England; who, in conjunction with Godfrey Watkinson, of Brampton Moor, Esq. (the principal resident Gentleman in the parish of Brampton) solicited, and obtained, his Grace's interest with the Dean of Lincoln: who, in consequence, nominated Mr. Pegge to the living.

One point now seemed to be gained towards his re-transplantation into his native soil, after he had resisted considerable offers had he continued in Kent; and thus did he think himself virtually in possession of a living in Derbyshire, which in its nature was tenable with Godmersham in Kent. Henceforward, then, he no doubt felt a satisfaction that he should soon be enabled to live in Derbyshire, and occasionally visit his friends in Kent, instead of residing in that county, and visiting his friends in Derbyshire.

But, after all this assiduity and anxiety (as if admission and ejection had pursued him a second time), the result of Mr. Pegge's expectations was far from answering his then present wishes; for, when he thought himself secure by the Dean's nomination, and that nothing was wanting but the Bishop's licence, the Dean's right of Patronage was controverted by the Parishioners of Brampton, who brought forward a Nominee of their own.

The ground of this claim, on the part of the Parish, was owing to an ill-judged indulgence of some former Deans of Lincoln, who had occasionally permitted the Parishioners to send an Incumbent directly to the Bishop for his licence, without the intermediate nomination of the Dean in due form.

These measures were principally fomented by the son of the last Incumbent, the Rev. Seth Ellis, a man of a reprobate character, and a disgrace to his profession, who wanted the living, and was patronised by the Parish. He had a desperate game to play; for he had not the least chance of obtaining any preferment, as no individual Patron, who was even superficially acquainted with his moral character alone, could with decency advance him in the church. To complete the detail of the fate of this man, whose interest the deluded part of the mal-contents of the parish so warmly espoused, he was soon after suspended by the Bishop from officiating at Brampton[13].

Whatever inducements the Parish might have to support Mr. Ellis so strenuously we do not say, though they manifestly did not arise from any pique to one Dean more than to another; and we are decidedly clear that they were not founded in any aversion to Mr. Pegge as an individual; for his character was in all points too well established, and too well known (even to the leading opponents to the Dean), to admit of the least personal dislike in any respect. So great, nevertheless, was the acrimony with which the Parishioners pursued their visionary pretensions to the Patronage, that, not content with the decision of the Jury (which was highly respectable) in favour of the Dean, when the right of Patronage was tried in 1748; they had the audacity to carry the cause to an Assize at Derby, where, on the fullest and most incontestable evidence, a verdict was given in favour of the Dean, to the confusion and indelible disgrace of those Parishioners who espoused so bad a cause, supported by the most undaunted effrontery.

The evidence produced by the Parish went to prove, from an entry made nearly half a century before in the accompts kept by the Churchwardens, that the Parishioners, and not the Deans of Lincoln, had hitherto, on a vacancy, nominated a successor to the Bishop of the Diocese for his licence, without the intervention of any other person or party. The Parish accompts were accordingly brought into court at Derby, wherein there appeared not only a palpable erasement, but such an one as was detected by a living and credible witness; for, a Mr. Mower swore that, on a vacancy in the year 1704, an application was made by the Parish to the Dean of Lincoln in favour of the Rev. Mr. Littlewood[14].

In corroboration of Mr. Mower's testimony, an article in the Parish accompts and expenditures of that year was adverted to, and which, when Mr. Mower saw it, ran thus:

"Paid William Wilcoxon, for going to Lincoln to the Dean concerning Mr. Littlewood, five shillings."

The Parishioners had before alleged, in proof of their title, that they had elected Mr. Littlewood; and, to uphold this asseveration, had clumsily altered the parish accompt-book, and inserted the words "to Lichfield to the Bishop," in the place of the words "to Lincoln to the Dean."

Thus their own evidence was turned against the Parishioners; and not a moment's doubt remained but that the patronage rested with the Dean of Lincoln.

We have related this affair without a strict adherence to chronological order as to facts, or to collateral circumstances, for the sake of preserving the narrative entire, as far as it regards the contest between the Dean of Lincoln and the Parish of Brampton; for we believe that this transaction (uninteresting as it may be to the publick in general) is one of very few instances on record which has an exact parallel.

The intermediate points of the contest, in which Mr. Pegge was more peculiarly concerned, and which did not prominently appear to the world, were interruptions and unpleasant impediments which arose in the course of this tedious process.

He had been nominated to the Perpetual Curacy of Brampton by Dr. Cheyney, Dean of Lincoln; was at the sole expence of the suit respecting the right of Patronage, whereby the verdict was given in favour of the Dean; and he was actually licensed by the Bishop of Lichfield. In consequence of this decision and the Bishop's licence, Mr. Pegge, not suspecting that the contest could go any farther, attended to qualify at Brampton, on Sunday, August 28, 1748, in the usual manner; but was repelled by violence from entering the Church.

In this state matters rested regarding the Patronage of Brampton, when Dr. Cheyney was unexpectedly transferred from the Deanry of Lincoln to the Deanry of Winchester, which (we may observe by the way) he solicited on motives similar to those which actuated Mr. Pegge at the very moment; for Dr. Cheyney, being a Native of Winchester, procured an exchange of his Deanry of Lincoln with the Rev. Dr. William George, Provost of Queen's college, Cambridge, for whom the Deanry of Winchester was intended by the Minister on the part of the Crown.

Thus Mr. Pegge's interests and applications were to begin de novo with the Patron of Brampton; for, his nomination by Dr. Cheyney, in the then state of things, was of no validity. He fell, however, into liberal hands; for his activity in the proceedings which had hitherto taken place respecting the living in question had rendered fresh advocates unnecessary, as it had secured the unasked favour of Dr. George, who not long afterwards voluntarily gave him the Rectory of Whittington, near Chesterfield, in Derbyshire; into which he was inducted Nov. 11, 1751, and where he resided for upwards of 44 years without interruption[15].

Though Mr. Pegge had relinquished all farther pretensions to the living of Brampton before the cause came to a decision at Derby, yet he gave every possible assistance at the trial, by the communication of various documents, as well as by his personal evidence at the Assize, to support the claim of the new Nominee, the Rev. John Bowman, in whose favour the verdict was given, and who afterwards enjoyed the benefice.

Here then we take leave of this troublesome affair, so nefarious and unwarrantable on the part of the Parishioners of Brampton; and from which Patrons of every description may draw their own inferences.

Mr. Pegge's ecclesiastical prospect in Derbyshire began soon to brighten; and he ere long obtained the more eligible living of Whittington. Add to this that, in the course of the dispute concerning the Patronage of Brampton, he became known to the Hon. and Right Rev. Frederick (Cornwallis) Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry; who ever afterwards favoured him not only with his personal regard, but with his patronage, which extended even beyond the grave, as will be mentioned hereafter in the order of time.

We must now revert to Mr. Pegge's old Friend Sir Edward Dering, who, at the moment when Mr. Pegge decidedly took the living of Whittington, in Derbyshire, began to negotiate with his Grace of Canterbury (Dr. Herring), the Patron of Godmersham, for an exchange of that living for something tenable with Whittington.

The Archbishop's answer to this application was highly honourable to Mr. Pegge: "Why," said his Grace, "will Mr. Pegge leave my Diocese? If he will continue in Kent, I promise you, Sir Edward, that I will give him preferment to his satisfaction[16]."

No allurements, however, could prevail; and Mr. Pegge, at all events, accepted the Rectory of Whittington, leaving every other pursuit of the kind to contingent circumstances. An exchange was, nevertheless, very soon afterwards effected, by the interest of Sir Edward with the Duke of Devonshire, who consented that Mr. Pegge should take his Grace's Rectory of Brinhill[17] in Lancashire, then luckily void, the Archbishop at the same time engaging to present the Duke's Clerk to Godmersham. Mr. Pegge was accordingly inducted into the Rectory of Brindle, Nov. 23, 1751, in less than a fortnight after his induction at Whittington[18].

In addition to this favour from the Family of Cavendish, Sir Edward Dering obtained for Mr. Pegge, almost at the same moment, a scarf from the Marquis of Hartington (afterwards the fourth Duke of Devonshire), then called up to the House of Peers, in June 1751, by the title of Baron Cavendish of Hardwick. Mr. Pegge's appointment is dated Nov. 18, 1751; and thus, after all his solicitude, he found himself possessed of two livings and a dignity, honourably and indulgently conferred, as well as most desirably connected, in the same year and in the same month; though this latter circumstance may be attributed to the voluntary lapse of Whittington[19]. After Mr. Pegge had held the Rectory of Brinhill for a few years, an opportunity offered, by another obliging acquiescence of the Duke of Devonshire, to exchange it for the living of Heath (alias Lown), in his Grace's Patronage, which lies within seven miles of Whittington: a very commodious measure, as it brought Mr. Pegge's parochial preferments within a smaller distance of each other. He was accordingly inducted into the Vicarage of Heath, Oct. 22, 1758, which he held till his death.

This was the last favour of the kind which Mr. Pegge individually received from the Dukes of Devonshire; but the Compiler of this little Memoir regarding his late Father, flatters himself that it can give no offence to that Noble Family if he takes the opportunity of testifying a sense of his own personal obligations to William the fourth Duke of Devonshire, when his Grace was Lord Chamberlain of his Majesty's Household.

As to Mr. Pegge's other preferments, they shall only be briefly mentioned in chronological order; but with due regard to his obligations. In the year 1765 he was presented to the Perpetual Curacy of Wingerworth, about six miles from. Whittington, by the Honourable and Reverend James Yorke, then Dean of Lincoln, afterwards Bishop of Ely, to whom he was but little known but by name and character. This appendage was rendered the more acceptable to Mr. Pegge, because the seat of his very respectable Friend Sir Henry Hunloke, Bart. is in the parish, from whom, and all the Family, Mr. Pegge ever received great civilities.

We have already observed, that Mr. Pegge became known, insensibly as it were, to the Honourable and Right Reverend Frederick (Cornwallis), Bishop of Lichfield, during the contest respecting the living of Brampton; from whom he afterwards received more than one favour, and by whom another greater instance of regard was intended, as will be mentioned hereafter.

Mr. Pegge was first collated by his Lordship to the Prebend of Bobenhull, in the Church of Lichfield, in 1757; and was afterwards voluntarily advanced by him to that of Whittington in 1763, which he possessed at his death[20].

In addition to the Stall at Lichfield, Mr. Pegge enjoyed the Prebend of Louth, in the Cathedral of Lincoln, to which he had been collated (in 1772) by his old acquaintance, and Fellow-collegian, the late Right Reverend John Green, Bishop of that See[21].

This seems to be the proper place to subjoin, that, towards the close of his life, Mr. Pegge declined a situation for which, in more early days, he had the greatest predilection, and had taken every active and modest measure to obtain—a Residentiaryship in the Church of Lichfield.

Mr. Pegge's wishes tended to this point on laudable, and almost natural motives, as soon as his interest with the Bishop began to gain strength; for it would have been a very pleasant interchange, at that period of life, to have passed a portion of the year at Lichfield. This expectation, however, could not be brought forward till he was too far advanced in age to endure with tolerable convenience a removal from time to time; and therefore, when the offer was realized, he declined the acceptance.

The case was literally this: While Mr. Pegge's elevation in the Church of Lichfield rested solely upon Bishop (Frederick) Cornwallis, it was secure, had a vacancy happened: but his Patron was translated to Canterbury in 1768, and Mr. Pegge had henceforward little more than personal knowledge of any of his Grace's Successors at Lichfield, till the Hon. and Right Reverend James Cornwallis (the Archbishop's Nephew) was consecrated Bishop of that See in 1781.

On this occasion, to restore the balance in favour of Mr. Pegge, the Archbishop had the kindness to make an Option of the Residentiaryship at Lichfield, then possessed by the Rev. Thomas Seward. It was, nevertheless, several years before even the tender of this preferment could take place; as his Grace of Canterbury died in 1783, while Mr. Seward was living.

Options being personal property, Mr. Pegge's interest, on the demise of the Archbishop, fell into the hands of the Hon. Mrs. Cornwallis, his Relict and Executrix, who fulfilled his Grace's original intention in the most friendly manner, on the death of Mr. Seward, in 1790[22].

The little occasional transactions which primarily brought Mr. Pegge within the notice of Bishop (Frederick) Cornwallis at Eccleshall-castle led his Lordship to indulge him with a greater share of personal esteem than has often fallen to the lot of a private Clergyman so remotely placed from his Diocesan. Mr. Pegge had attended his Lordship two or three times on affairs of business, as one of the Parochial Clergy, after which the Bishop did him the honour to invite him to make an annual visit at Eccleshall-castle as an Acquaintance. The compliance with this overture was not only very flattering, but highly gratifying, to Mr. Pegge, who consequently waited upon his Lordship for a fortnight in the Autumn, during several years, till the Bishop was translated to the Metropolitical See of Canterbury in 1768. After this, however, his Grace did not forget his humble friend, the Rector of Whittington, as will be seen; and sometimes corresponded with him on indifferent matters.

About the same time that Mr. Pegge paid these visits at Eccleshall-castle, he adopted an expedient to change the scene, likewise, by a journey to London (between Easter and Whitsuntide); where, for a few years, he was entertained by his old Friend and Fellow-collegian the Rev. Dr. John Taylor, F. S. A. Chancellor of Lincoln, &c. (the learned Editor of Demosthenes and Lysias), then one of the Residentiaries of St. Paul's.

After Dr. Taylor's death (1766), the Bishop of Lincoln, Dr. John Green, another old College-acquaintance, became Mr. Pegge's London-host for a few years, till Archbishop Cornwallis began to reside at Lambeth. This event superseded the visits to Bishop Green, as Mr. Pegge soon afterwards received a very friendly invitation from his Grace; to whom, from that time, he annually paid his respects at Lambeth-palace, for a month in the Spring, till the Archbishop's decease, which took place about Easter 1783.

All these were delectable visits to a man of Mr. Pegge's turn of mind, whose conversation was adapted to every company, and who enjoyed the world with greater relish from not living in it every day. The society with which he intermixed, in such excursions, changed his ideas, and relieved him from the tædium of a life of much reading and retirement; as, in the course of these journeys, he often had opportunities of meeting old Friends, and of making new literary acquaintance.

On some of these occasions he passed for a week into Kent, among such of his old Associates as were then living, till the death of his much-honoured Friend, and former Parishioner, the elder Thomas Knight, Esq. of Godmersham, in 1781[23]. We ought on no account to omit the mention of some extra-visits which Mr. Pegge occasionally made to Bishop Green, at Buckden, to which we are indebted for the Life of that excellent Prelate Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln;—a work upon which we shall only observe here, that it is Dr. Pegge's chef-d'œuvre, and merits from the world much obligation. To these interviews with Bishop Green, we may also attribute those ample Collections, which Dr. Pegge left among his MSS. towards a History of the Bishops of Lincoln, and of that Cathedral in general, &c. &c.

With the decease of Archbishop Cornwallis (1783), Mr. Pegge's excursions to London terminated. His old familiar Friends, and principal acquaintance there, were gathered to their fathers; and he felt that the lot of a long life had fallen upon him, having survived not only the first, but the second class of his numerous distant connexions.

While on one of these visits at Lambeth, the late Gustavus Brander, Esq. F. S. A. who entertained an uncommon partiality for Mr. Pegge, persuaded him, very much against his inclination, to sit for a Drawing, from which an octavo Print of him might be engraved by Basire. The Work went on so slowly, that the Plate was not finished till 1785, when Mr. Pegge's current age was 81. Being a private Print, it was at first only intended for, and distributed among, the particular Friends of Mr. Brander and Mr. Pegge. This Print, however, now carries with it something of a publication; for a considerable number of the impressions were dispersed after Mr. Brander's death, when his Library, &c. were sold by auction; and the Print is often found prefixed to copies of "The Forme of Cury," a work which will hereafter be specified among Mr. Pegge's literary labours[24].

The remainder of Mr. Pegge's life after the year 1783 was, in a great measure, reduced to a state of quietude; but not without an extensive correspondence with the world in the line of Antiquarian researches: for he afterwards contributed largely to the Archæologia, and the Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica, &c. &c. as may appear to those who will take the trouble to compare the dates of his Writings, which will hereafter be enumerated, with the time of which we are speaking.

The only periodical variation in life, which attended Mr. Pegge after the Archbishop's death, consisted of Summer visits at Eccleshall-castle to the present Bishop (James) Cornwallis, who (if we may be allowed the word) adopted Mr. Pegge as his guest so long as he was able to undertake such journeys.

We have already seen an instance of his Lordship's kindness in the case of the intended Residentiaryship; and have, moreover, good reasons to believe that, had the late Archdeacon of Derby (Dr. Henry Egerton) died at an earlier stage of Mr. Pegge's life, he would have succeeded to that dignity.

This part of the Memoir ought not to be dismissed without observing, to the honour of Mr. Pegge, that, as it was not in his power to make any individual return (in his life-time) to his Patrons, the two Bishops of Lichfield of the name of Cornwallis, for their extended civilities, he directed, by testamentary instructions, that one hundred volumes out of his Collection of Books should be given to the Library of the Cathedral of Lichfield[25].

During Mr. Pegge's involuntary retreat from his former associations with the more remote parts of the Kingdom, he was actively awake to such objects in which he was implicated nearer home.

Early in the year 1788 material repairs and considerable alterations became necessary to the Cathedral of Lichfield. A subscription was accordingly begun by the Members of the Church, supported by many Lay-gentlemen of the neighbourhood; when Mr. Pegge, as a Prebendary, not only contributed handsomely, but projected, and drew up, a circular letter, addressed to the Rev. Charles Hope, M. A. the Minister of All Saints (the principal) Church in Derby, recommending the promotion of this public design. The Letter, being inserted in several Provincial Newspapers, was so well seconded by Mr. Hope, that it had a due effect upon the Clergy and Laity of the Diocese in general; for which Mr. Pegge received a written acknowledgment of thanks from the present Bishop of Lichfield, dated May 29, 1788.

This year (1788), memorable as a Centenary in the annals of England, was honourable to the little Parish of Whittington, which accidentally bore a subordinate local part in the History of the Revolution; for it was to an inconsiderable public-house there (still called the Revolution-house) that the Earl of Devonshire, the Earl of Danby, the Lord Delamere, and the Hon. John D'Arcy, were driven for shelter, by a sudden shower of rain, from the adjoining common (Whittington-Moor), where they had met by appointment, disguised as farmers, to concert measures, unobservedly, for promoting the succession of King William III. after the abdication of King James II.[26]

The celebration of this Jubilee, on Nov. 5, 1788, is related at large in the Gentleman's Magazine of that month[27]; on which day Mr. Pegge preached a Sermon[28], apposite to the occasion, which was printed at the request of the Gentlemen of the Committee who conducted the ceremonial[29], which proceeded from his Church to Chesterfield in grand procession.

In the year 1791 (July 8) Mr. Pegge was created D. C. L. by the University of Oxford, at the Commemoration. It may be thought a little extraordinary that he should accept an advanced Academical Degree so late in life, as he wanted no such aggrandizement in the Learned World, or among his usual Associates, and had voluntarily closed all his expectations of ecclesiastical elevation. We are confident that he was not ambitious of the compliment; for, when it was first proposed to him, he put a negative upon it. It must be remembered that this honour was not conferred on an unknown man (novus homo); but on a Master of Arts of Cambridge, of name and character, and of acknowledged literary merit[30]. Had Mr. Pegge been desirous of the title of Doctor in earlier life, there can be no doubt but that he might have obtained the superior degree of D. D. from Abp. Cornwallis, upon the bare suggestion, during his familiar and domestic conversations with his Grace at Lambeth-palace.

Dr. Pegge's manners were those of a gentleman of a liberal education, who had seen much of the world, and had formed them upon the best models within his observation. Having in his early years lived in free intercourse with many of the principal and best-bred Gentry in various parts of Kent; he ever afterwards preserved the same attentions, by associating with respectable company, and (as we have seen) by forming honourable attachments.

In his avocations from reading and retirement, few men could relax with more ease and cheerfulness, or better understood the desipere in loco;—could enter occasionally into temperate convivial mirth with a superior grace, or more interest and enliven every company by general conversation.

As he did not mix in business of a public nature, his better qualities appeared most conspicuously in private circles; for he possessed an equanimity which obtained the esteem of his Friends, and an affability which procured the respect of his dependents.

His habits of life were such as became his profession and station. In his clerical functions he was exemplarily correct, not entrusting his parochial duties at Whittington (where he constantly resided) to another (except to the neighbouring Clergy during the excursions before-mentioned) till the failure of his eye-sight rendered it indispensably necessary; and even that did not happen till within a few years of his death.

As a Preacher, his Discourses from the pulpit were of the didactic and exhortatory kind, appealing to the understandings rather than to the passions of his Auditory, by expounding the Holy Scriptures in a plain, intelligible, and unaffected manner. His voice was naturally weak, and suited only to a small Church; so that when he occasionally appeared before a large Congregation (as on Visitations, &c.), he was heard to a disadvantage. He left in his closet considerably more than 230 Sermons composed by himself, and in his own hand-writing, besides a few (not exceeding 26) which he had transcribed (in substance only, as appears by collation) from the printed works of eminent Divines. These liberties, however, were not taken in his early days, from motives of idleness, or other attachments—but later in life, to favour the fatigue of composition; all which obligations he acknowledged at the end of each such Sermon.

Though Dr. Pegge's life was sedentary, from his turn to studious retirement, his love of Antiquities, and of literary acquirements in general; yet these applications, which he pursued with, great ardour and perseverance, did not injure his health. Vigour of mind, in proportion to his bodily strength, continued unimpaired through a very extended course of life, and nearly till he had reached "ultima linea rerum:" for he never had any chronical disease; but gradually and gently sunk into the grave under the weight of years, after a fortnight's illness, Feb. 14, 1796, in the 92d year of his age.

He was buried, according to his own desire, in the chancel at Whittington, where a mural tablet of black marble (a voluntary tribute of filial respect) has been placed, over the East window with the following short inscription:

"At the North End of the Altar Table, within the Rails,
lie the Remains of
Samuel Pegge, LL. D.
who was inducted to this Rectory Nov. 11, 1751,
and died Feb. 14, 1796;
in the 92d year of his Age."

Having closed the scene; it must be confessed, on the one hand, that the biographical history of an individual, however learned, or engaging to private friends, who had passed the major part of his days in secluded retreats from what is called the world, can afford but little entertainment to the generality of Readers. On the other hand, nevertheless, let it be allowed that every man of acknowledged literary merit, had he made no other impression, cannot but have left many to regret his death.

Though Dr. Pegge had exceeded even his "fourscore years and ten," and had outlived all his more early friends and acquaintance; he had the address to make new ones, who now survive, and who, it is humbly hoped, will not be sorry to see a modest remembrance of him preserved by this little Memoir.

Though Dr. Pegge had an early propensity to the pursuit of Antiquarian knowledge, he never indulged himself materially in it, so long as more essential and professional occupations had a claim upon him; for he had a due sense of the nature and importance of his clerical function. It appears that he had read the Greek and Latin Fathers diligently at his outset in life. He had also re-perused the Classicks attentively before he applied much to the Monkish Historians, or engaged in Antiquarian researches; well knowing that a thorough knowledge of the Learning of the Antients, conveyed by classical Authors, was the best foundation for any literary structure which had not the Christian Religion for its cornerstone.

During the early part of his incumbency at Godmersham in Kent, his reading was principally such as became a Divine, or which tended to the acquisition of general knowledge, of which he possessed a greater share than most men we ever knew. When he obtained allowable leisure to follow unprofessional pursuits, he attached himself more closely to the study of Antiquities; and was elected a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, Feb. 14, 1751, N. S. in which year the Charter of Incorporation was granted (in November), wherein his name stands enrolled among those of many very respectable and eminently learned men[31].

Though we will be candid enough to allow that Dr. Pegge's style in general was not sufficiently terse and compact to be called elegant; yet he made ample amends by the matter, and by the accuracy with which he treated every copious subject, wherein all points were matured by close examination and sound judgment[32].

and a fund of knowledge, more than would have displayed itself in any greater work, where the subject requires but one bias, and one peculiar attention[33].

It is but justice to say, that few men were so liberal in the diffusion of the knowledge which he had acquired, or more ready to communicate it, either vivâ voce, or by the loan of his MSS. as many of his living Friends can testify.

In his publications he was also equally disinterested as in his private communications; for he never, as far as can be recollected, received any pecuniary advantage from any pieces that he printed, committing them all to the press, with the sole reserve of a few copies to distribute among his particular Friends[34]. —No. III. 1766. "An Essay on the Coins of Cunobelin; in an Epistle to the Right Rev. Bishop of Carlisle [Charles Lyttelton], President of the Society of Antiquaries." [105 pages, 4to.] [This collection of coins is classed in two plates, and illustrated by a Commentary, together with observations on the word tascia. N. B. The impression consisted of no more than 200 copies.]—No. IV. 1772. "An Assemblage of Coins fabricated by Authority of the Archbishops of Canterbury. To which are subjoined, Two Dissertations." [125 pages, 4to.] 1. On a fine Coin of Alfred the Great, with his Head. 2. On an Unic, in the Possession of the late Mr. Thoresby, supposed to be a Coin of St. Edwin; but shewn to be a Penny of Edward the Confessor. [An Essay is annexed on the origin of metropolitical and other subordinate mints; with an Account of their Progress and final Determination: together with other incidental Matters, tending to throw light on a branch of the Science of Medals, not perfectly considered by English Medalists.]—No. V. 1772. "Fitz-Stephen's Description of the City of London, newly translated from the Latin Original, with a necessary Commentary, and a Dissertation on the Author, ascertaining the exact Year of the Production; to which are added, a correct Edition of the Original, with the various Readings, and many Annotations." [81 pages, 4to.] [This publication (well known now to have been one of the works of Dr. Pegge) was, as we believe, brought forward at the instance of the Hon. Daines Barrington, to whom it is inscribed. The number of copies printed was 250.]—No. VI. 1780. "The Forme of Cury. A Roll of antient English Cookery, compiled about the Year 1390, Temp. Ric. II. with a copious Index and Glossary." [8vo.] [The curious Roll, of which this is a copy, was the property of the late Gustavus Brander, esq. It is in the hand-writing of the time, a facsimile of which is given facing p. xxxi. of the Preface. The work before us was a private impression; but as, since Mr. Brander's decease, it has fallen, by sale, into a great many hands, we refer to the Preface for a farther account of it. Soon after Dr. Pegge's elucidation of the Roll was finished, Mr. Brander presented the autograph to the British Museum.]—No. VII. 1789. "Annales Eliæ de Trickenham, Monachi Ordinis Benedictini. Ex Bibliothecâ Lamethanâ." To which is added, "Compendium Compertorum. Ex Bibliothecâ Ducis Devoniæ." [4to.] [Both parts of this publication contain copious annotations by the Editor. The former was communicated by Mr. John Nichols, Printer, to whom it is inscribed. The latter was published by permission of his Grace the Duke of Devonshire, to whom it is dedicated. The respective Prefaces to these pieces will best explain the nature of them.]—No. VIII. 1793. "The Life of Robert Grosseteste, the celebrated Bishop of Lincoln." [4to.] [This Work we have justly called his chef-d'œuvre; for, in addition to the life of an individual, it comprises much important history of interesting times, together with abundant collateral matter.]—The two following works have appeared since the Writer's death: No. IX. 1801. "An Historical Account of Beauchief Abbey, in the County of Derby, from its first Foundation to its final Dissolution. Wherein the three following material Points, in opposition to vulgar Prejudices, are clearly established: 1st, That this Abbey did not take its name from the Head of Archbishop Becket, though it was dedicated to him. 2d, That the Founder of it had no hand in the Murder of that Prelate; and, consequently, that the House was not erected in Expiation of that Crime. 3d, The Dependance of this House on that of Welbeck, in the County of Nottingham; a Matter hitherto unknown." [4to.]—No. X. 1809. "Anonymiana; or, Ten Centuries of Observations on various Authors and Subjects. Compiled by a late very learned and reverend Divine; and faithfully published from the original MS. with the Addition of a copious Index." [8vo.]]

In the following Catalogue we must be allowed to deviate from chronological order, for the sake of preserving Dr. Pegge's contributions to various periodical and contingent Publications, distinct from his independent Works; to all which, however, we shall give (as far as possible) their respective dates.

The greatest honour, which a literary man can obtain, is the eulogies of those who possessed equal or more learning than himself. "Laudatus à laudatis viris" may peculiarly and deservedly be said of Dr. Pegge, as might be exemplified from the frequent mention made of him by the most respectable contemporary writers in the Archæological line; but modesty forbids our enumerating them.

Whittington Church, Derbyshire.

Gent. Mag. Supp. 1809. Pl. II, p. 1201.

Schnebbelie del. 1789.

The annexed View was taken in 1789, by the ingenious Mr. Jacob Schnebbelie; and the following concise account of it was communicated in 1793, by the then worthy and venerable Rector.

"Whittington, of whose Church the annexed Plate contains a Drawing by the late Mr. Schnebbelie, is a small parish of about 14 or 15 hundred acres, distant from the church and old market-place of Chesterfield about two miles and a half. It lies in the road from Chesterfield to Sheffield and Rotherham, whose roads divide there at the well-known inn The Cock and Magpye, commonly called The Revolution House.

The situation is exceedingly pleasant, in a pure and excellent air. It abounds with all kinds of conveniences for the use of the inhabitants, as coal, stone, timber, &c.; besides its proximity to a good market, to take its products.

The Church is now a little Rectory, in the gift of the Dean of Lincoln. At first it was a Chapel of Ease to Chesterfield, a very large manor and parish; of which I will give the following short but convincing proof. The Dean of Lincoln, as I said, is Patron of this Rectory, and yet William Rufus gave no other church in this part of Derbyshire to the church of St. Mary at Lincoln but the church of Chesterfield; and, moreover, Whittington is at this day a parcel of the great and extensive manor of Chesterfield; whence it follows, that Whittington must have been once a part both of the rectory and manor of Chesterfield. But whence comes it, you will say, that it became a rectory, for such it has been many years? I answer, I neither know how nor when; but it is certain that chapels of ease have been frequently converted into rectories, and I suppose by mutual agreement of the curate of the chapel, the rector of the mother church, and the diocesan. Instances of the like emancipation of chapels, and transforming them into independent rectories, there are several in the county of Derby, as Matlock, Bonteshall, Bradley, &c.; and others may be found in Mr. Nichols's "History of Hinckley," and in his "Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica," No. VI.

Fig. 1 is an inscription on the Ting-tang, or Saints Bell, of Whittington Church, drawn by Mr. Schnebbelie, 27 July, 1789, from an impression taken in clay. This bell, which is seen in the annexed view, hangs within a stone frame, or tabernacle, at the top of the church, on the outside between the Nave and the Chancel. It has a remarkable fine shrill tone, and is heard, it is said, three or four miles off, if the wind be right. It is very antient, as appears both from the form of the letters, and the name (of the donor, I suppose), which is that in use before surnames were common. Perhaps it may be as old as the fabrick of the church itself, though this is very antient.

Fig. 2 is a stone head, near the roof on the North side of the church.

In the East window of the church is a small Female Saint.

In this window, A. a fess Vaire G. and O. between three water-bougets Sable. Dethick.

Cheque A. and G. on a bend S. a martlet. Beckering.

At the bottom of this window an inscription,

Rogero Cric.

Roger Criche was rector, and died 1413, and probably made the window. He is buried within the rails of the communion-table, and his slab is engraved in the second volume of Mr. Gough's "Sepulchral Monuments of Great Britain," Plate XIX. p. 37. Nothing remains of the inscription but Amen.

In the upper part of the South window of the Chancel, is a picture in glass of our Saviour with the five Wounds; an angel at his left hand sounding a trumpet[35].—On a pane of the upper tier of the West window is the portrait of St. John; his right hand holding a book with the Holy Lamb upon it: and the forefinger of his left hand pointing to the Cross held by the Lamb, as uttering his well-known confession: "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world[35]."

In the South window of the Chancel is, Barry wavy of 6 A. and G. a chief A. Ermine and Gules. Barley.

Ermine, on a chief indented G. or lozengé.

In the Easternmost South window of the nave is A. on a chevron Sable, three quatrefoils Argent. Eyre.

This window has been renewed; before which there were other coats and some effigies in it.

Jan. 1, 1793.

Samuel Pegge, Rector."

This View was taken also, in 1789, by Mr. Schnebbelie; and the account of it drawn up in 1793 by Dr. Pegge, then resident in it, at the advanced age of 88.

"The Parsonage-house at Whittington is a convenient substantial stone building, and very sufficient for this small benefice. It was, as I take it, erected by the Rev. Thomas Callice, one of my predecessors; and, when I had been inducted, I enlarged it, by pulling down the West end, making a cellar, a kitchen, a brew-house, and a pantry, with chambers over them. There is a glebe of about 30 acres belonging to it with a garden large enough for a family, and a small orchard. The garden is remarkably pleasant in respect to its fine views to the North, East, and South, with the Church to the West. There is a fair prospect of Chesterfield Church, distant about two miles and a half; and of Bolsover Castle to the West; and, on the whole, this Rectorial house may be esteemed a very delightful habitation.

S. Pegge."

In this Parsonage the Editor of the present Volume, accompanied by his late excellent Friend Mr. Gough, spent many happy hours with the worthy Rector for several successive years, and derived equal information and pleasure from his instructive conversation.

Whittington Rectory.

Gent. Mag. Sep. 1810. Pl. II, p. 217.

Schnebbelie del.

To complete the little series of Views at Whittington more immediately connected with Dr. Pegge, a third plate is here given, from another Drawing by Mr. Schnebbelie, of the small public-house at Whittington, which has been handed down to posterity for above a century under the honourable appellation of "The Revolution House." It obtained that name from the accidental meeting of two noble personages, Thomas Osborne Earl of Danby, and William Cavendish Earl of Devonshire, with a third person, Mr. John D'Arcy[36], privately one morning, 1688, upon Whittington, Moor, as a middle place between Chatsworth, Kniveton, and Aston, their respective residences, to consult about the Revolution, then in agitation[37]; but a shower of rain happening to fall, they removed to the village for shelter, and finished their conversation at a public-house there, the sign of The Cock and Pynot[38].

The part assigned to the Earl of Danby was, to surprize York; in which he succeeded: after which, the Earl of Devonshire was to take measures at Nottingham, where the Declaration for a free Parliament, which he, at the head of a number of Gentlemen of Derbyshire, had signed Nov. 28, 1688[39], was adopted by the Nobility, Gentry, and Commonalty of the Northern Counties, assembled there for the defence of the Laws, Religion, and Properties[40].

The success of these measures is well known; and to the concurrence of these Patriots with the proceedings in favour of the Prince of Orange in the West, is this Nation indebted for the establishment of her rights and liberties at the glorious Revolution.

The cottage here represented stands at the point where the road from Chesterfield divides into two branches, to Sheffield and Rotherham. The room where the Noblemen sat is 15 feet by 12 feet 10, and is to this day called The Plotting Parlour. The old armed chair, still remaining in it, is shewn by the landlord with particular satisfaction, as that in which it is said the Earl of Devonshire sat; and he tells with equal pleasure, how it was visited by his descendants, and the descendants of his associates, in the year 1788. Some new rooms, for the better accommodation of customers, were added about 20 years ago.

The Duke of Leeds' own account of his meeting the Earl of Devonshire and Mr. John D'Arcy[41] at Whittington, in the County of Derby, A. D. 1688.

The Earl of Derby, afterwards Duke of Leeds, was impeached, A.D. 1678, of High Treason by the House of Commons, on a charge of being in the French interest, and, in particular, of being Popishly affected: many, both Peers and Commoners, were misled, and had conceived an erroneous opinion concerning him and his political conduct. This he has stated himself, in the Introduction to his Letters, printed A. 1710, where he says, "That the malice of my accusation did so manifestly appear in that article wherein I was charged to be Popishly affected, that I dare swear there was not one of my accusers that did then believe that article against me."

His Grace then proceeds, for the further clearing of himself, in these memorable words, relative to the meeting at Whittington, the subject of this memoir.

"The Duke of Devonshire also, when we were partners in the secret trust about the Revolution, and who did meet me and Mr. John D'Arcy, for that purpose, at a town called Whittington, in Derbyshire, did, in the presence of the said Mr. D'Arcy, make a voluntary acknowledgment of the great mistakes he had been led into about me; and said, that both he, and most others, were entirely convinced of their error. And he came to Sir Henry Goodrick's house in Yorkshire purposely to meet me there again, in order to concert the times and methods by which he should act at Nottingham (which was to be his post), and one at York (which was to be mine); and we agreed, that I should first attempt to surprize York, because there was a small garrison with a Governor there; whereas Nottingham was but an open town, and might give an alarm to York, if he should appear in arms before I had made my attempt upon York; which was done accordingly[42]; but is mistaken in divers relations of it. And I am confident that Duke (had he been now alive) would have thanked nobody for putting his prosecution of me amongst the glorious actions of his life."

Celebration of the Revolution Jubilee, at Whittington and Chesterfield, on the 4th and 5th of November, 1788.

On Tuesday the 4th instant, the Committee appointed to conduct the Jubilee had a previous meeting, and dined together at the Revolution House in Whittington. His Grace the Duke of Devonshire, Lord Stamford, Lord George and Lord John Cavendish, with several neighbouring Gentlemen, were present. After dinner a subscription was opened for the erecting of a Monumental Column, in Commemoration of the Glorious Revolution, on that spot where the Earls of Devonshire and Danby, Lord Delamere, and Mr. John D'Arcy, met to concert measures which were eminently instrumental in rescuing the Liberties of their Country from perdition. As this Monument is intended to be not less a mark of public Gratitude, than the memorial of an important event; it was requested, that the present Representatives of the above-mentioned families would excuse their not being permitted to join in the expence.

On the 5th, at eleven in the morning, the commemoration commenced with divine service at Whittington Church. The Rev. Mr. Pegge, the Rector of the Parish, delivered an excellent Sermon from the words "This is the day, &c." Though of a great age, having that very morning entered his 85th year, he spoke with a spirit which seemed to be derived from the occasion, his sentiments were pertinent, well arranged, and his expression animated.

The descendants of the illustrious houses of Cavendish, Osborne, Boothe, and Darcy (for the venerable Duke of Leeds, whose age would not allow him to attend, had sent his two grandsons, in whom the blood of Osborne and D'Arcy is united); a numerous and powerful gentry; a wealthy and respectable yeomanry; a hardy, yet decent and attentive peasantry; whose intelligent countenances shewed that they understood, and would be firm to preserve that blessing, for which they were assembled to return thanks to Almighty God, presented a truly solemn spectacle, and to the eye of a philosopher the most interesting that can be imagined.

After service the company went in succession to view the old house, and the room called by the Anti-revolutionists "The Plotting-Parlour," with the old armed-chair in which the Earl of Devonshire is said to have sitten, and every one was then pleased to partake of a very elegant cold collation, which was prepared in the new rooms annexed to the cottage. Some time being spent in this, the procession began:

Constables with long staves, two and two.

The Eight Clubs, four and four; viz.

1. Mr. Deakin's: Flag, blue, with orange fringe, on it the figure of Liberty, the motto, "The Protestant Religion, and the Liberties of England, we will maintain."

2. Mr. Bluett's: Flag, blue, fringed with orange, motto, "Libertas; quæ sera, tamen respexit inertem." Underneath the figure of Liberty crowning Britannia with a wreath of laurels, who is represented sitting on a Lion, at her feet the Cornucopiæ of Plenty; at the top next the pole, a Castle, emblematical of the house where the club is kept; on the lower side of the flag Liberty holding a Cap and resting on the Cavendish arms.

3. Mr. Ostliff's: Flag, broad blue and orange stripe, with orange fringe; in the middle the Cavendish arms; motto as No. 1.

4. Mrs. Barber's: Flag, garter blue and orange quarter'd, with white fringe, mottoes, "Liberty secured." "The Glorious Revolution 1688."

5. Mr. Valentine Wilkinson's: Flag, blue with orange fringe, in the middle the figure of Liberty; motto as No. 1.

6. Mr. Stubbs: Flag, blue with orange fringe, motto, "Liberty, Property, Trade, Manufactures;" at the top a head of King William crowned with laurel, in the middle in a large oval, "Revolution 1688." On one side the Cap of Liberty, on the other the figure of Britannia; on the opposite side the flag of the Devonshire arms.

Mrs. Ollerenshaw's: Flag, blue with orange fringe; motto as No. 1. on both sides.

Mr. Marsingale's: Flag, blue with orange fringe; at the top the motto, "In Memory of the Glorious Assertors of British Freedom 1688," beneath, the figure of Liberty leaning on a shield, on which is inscribed, "Revolted from Tyranny at Whittington 1688;" and having in her hand a scroll with the words "Bill of Rights" underneath a head of King William the Third; on the other side the flag, the motto, "The Glorious Revolter from Tyranny 1688" underneath the Devonshire arms; at the bottom the following inscription, "Willielmus Dux Devon. Bonorum Principum Fidelis Subditus; Inimicus et Invisus Tyrannis."

The Members of the Clubs were estimated 2000
persons, each having a white wand in his hand
with blue and orange tops and favours, with
the Revolution stamped upon them.

The Derbyshire militia's band of music.

The Corporation of Chesterfield in their formalities,
who joined the procession on entering the town.

The Duke of Devonshire in his coach and six.

Attendants on horseback with four led horses.

The Earl of Stamford in his post chaise and four.

Attendants on horseback.

The Earl of Danby and Lord Francis Osborne in their
post-chaise and four.

Attendants on horseback.

Lord George Cavendish in his post-chaise and four.

Attendants on horseback.

Lord John Cavendish in his post-chaise and four.

Attendants on horseback.

Sir Francis Molyneux and Sir Henry Hunloke, Barts.
in Sir Henry's coach and six.

Attendants on horseback.

And upwards of forty other carriages of the neighbouring
gentry, with their attendants.

Gentlemen on horseback, three and three.

Servants on horseback, ditto.

The procession in the town of Chesterfield went along Holywell-Street, Saltergate, Glumangate, then to the left along the upper side of the Market-place to Mr. Wilkinson's house, down the street past the Mayor's house, along the lower side of the Market-place to the end of the West Barrs, from thence past Dr. Milnes's house to the Castle, where the Derbyshire band of music formed in the centre and played "Rule Britannia," "God save the King, &c." the Clubs and Corporation still proceeding in the same order to the Mayor's and then dispersed.

Revolution House at Whittington.

Gent. Mag. Suppl. to Vol. LXXX. Part II, p. 609.

Schnebbelie del.

The whole was conducted with order and regularity, for notwithstanding there were fifty carriages, 400 gentlemen on horseback, and an astonishing throng of spectators, not an accident happened. All was joy and gladness, without a single burst of unruly tumult and uproar. The approving eye of Heaven shed its auspicious beams, and blessed this happy day with more than common splendour.

The company was so numerous as scarcely to be accommodated at the three principal inns. It would be a piece of injustice not to mention the dinner at the Castle, which was served in a style of unusual elegance.

The following toasts were afterwards given:

1. The King.
2. The glorious and immortal Memory of King William the IIId.
3. The Memory of the Glorious Revolution.
4. The Memory of those Friends to their Country, who, at the risk of their lives and fortunes, were instrumental in effecting the Glorious Revolution in 1688.
5. The Law of the Land.
6. The Prince of Wales.
7. The Queen, and the rest of the Royal Family.
8. Prosperity to the British Empire.
9. The Duke of Leeds, and prosperity to the House of Osborne.
10. The Duke of Devonshire, and prosperity to the House of Cavendish.
11. The Earl of Stamford, and prosperity to the united House of Boothe and Grey.
12. The Earl of Danby, and prosperity to the united House of Osborne and Darcy.
13. All the Friends of the Revolution met this year to commemorate that glorious Event.
14. The Dke of Portland.
15. Prosperity to the County of Derby.
16. The Members for the County.
17. The Members for the Borough of Derby.
18. The Duchess of Devonshire, &c.

In the evening a brilliant exhibition of fireworks was played off, under the direction of Signor Pietro; during which the populace were regaled with a proper distribution of liquor. The day concluded with a ball, at which were present near 300 gentlemen and ladies; amongst whom were many persons of distinction. The Duchess of Devonshire, surrounded by the bloom of the Derbyshire hills, is a picture not to be pourtrayed. Near 250 ball-tickets were received at the door.

The warm expression of gratitude and affection sparkling in every eye, must have excited in the breasts of those noble personages, whose ancestors were the source of this felicity, a sensation which Monarchs in all their glory might envy. The utmost harmony and felicity prevailed throughout the whole meeting. An hogshead of ale was given to the populace at Whittington, and three hogsheads at Chesterfield; where the Duke of Devonshire gave also three guineas to each of the eight clubs.

It was not the least pleasing circumstance attending this meeting, that all party distinctions were forgotten. Persons of all ranks and denominations wore orange and blue, in memory of our glorious Deliverer; And the most respectable Roman Catholic families, satisfied with the mild toleration of government in the exercise of their Religion, vied in their endeavours to shew how just a sense they had of the value of Civil Liberty.

Letter from the Rev. P. Cunningham to Mr. Pegge.

Eyam, near Tideswal,
Nov. 2, 1788.

Rev. and dear Sir,

You will please to accept of the inclosed Stanzas, and the Ode for the Jubilee, as a little testimony of the Author's respectful remembrance of regard; and of his congratulations, that it has pleased Divine Providence to prolong your days, to take a distinguished part in the happy commemoration of the approaching Fifth of November.

Having accidentally heard yesterday the Text you proposed for your Discourse on Wednesday, I thought the adoption of it, as an additional truth to the one I had chosen, would be regarded as an additional token of implied respect. In that light I flatter myself you will consider it.

I shall be happy if these poetic effusions should be considered by you as a proof of the sincere respect and esteem with which I subscribe myself,

Dear Sir, your faithful humble servant,

P. Cunningham.

Stanzas, by the Rev. P. Cunningham, occasioned by the Revolution Jubilee, at Whittington and Chesterfield, Nov. 5, 1788. Inscribed to the Rev. Samuel Pegge, Rector of Whittington.

"This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it." Psalms.

"Esto perpetua!" F. P. Sarpi da Venez.

Eyam, Derbyshire.

P. C.

Ode for the Revolution Jubilee, 1788.

Dear Sir,

Whittington, Oct. 11, 1788.

We are to have most grand doings at this place, 5th of November next, at the Revolution House, which I believe you saw when you was here. The Resolutions of the Committee were ordered to be inserted in the London prints[49]; so I presume you may have seen them, and that I am desired to preach the Sermon.

I remain your much obliged, &c.

S. Pegge.

Whittington, Nov. 29, 1788.

My dear Mr. Gough,

Mr. Rooke slept at the Vicarage on the 4th, in order to be ready for our grand celebrity the next day; and to distribute then to his friends his drawing, which he had caused to be engraved by Basire, of the Revolution House at Whittington, which he did, with a paper of mine, respecting the meeting there of the Earl of Devonshire, the Earl of Derby, &c. in 1688, annexed.

The 5th of November is now gone and over, and they said I acquitted myself very well. Indeed, I was in good spirits, and, as my Son-in-law read the prayers, I went fresh into the pulpit. The Duke of Devon was too late; but we had the Earl of Stamford at church, with Lord George and Lord John Cavendish, Lord Danby (Son of the Marquis of Carmarthen), and Lord Francis Osborne, with their Preceptor Dr. Jackson, Prebendary of Westminster, &c. The cavalcade from Whittington to Chesterfield, where we were to dine at four o'clock, was amazingly grand, no less than 50 coaches and chaises with horses dressed with orange ribbons; large and fine banners, with sundry bands of music. There were about 1000 on foot, with orange cockades, and about 300 on horseback, many of whom, besides cockades, were in blue, with orange capes. At half past six the fireworks, by an Italian artist, began, and very admirable they were; he had twenty pounds given him by the Managers. The ball room, at nine, was so crowded that, though it is large, there could be but little dancing. The ball was given to the Ladies, with an entertainment of cakes, sweetmeats, negus, &c. It was a fine day; and not the least accident happened, though it is supposed not less than 30,000 people were assembled. Hogsheads of liquor were given by the Managers at Whittington and Chesterfield, and the Duke of Devon gave twenty-four guineas to the footmen mentioned above. I saw nobody however in liquor; and when Mr. Rooke and I returned to Whittington, at one o'clock or after, we had a sober driver.

It happened to be my birth-day; which being known to some gentlemen at all the three great inns where the company dined, they drank my health with three cheers, requesting me to print my Sermon. This request I have complied with, and it is now printed at Chesterfield; I will take care that a copy be sent to you and Mr. Nichols. But I must observe to you on the occasion, that the Sermon will not read so well as it was heard, because having good command over myself at the time, I delivered it with energy and emphasis.

There will be a monument erected at the Revolution House in Whittington; a column I suppose; and 148 guineas are already subscribed. N. B. The Duke of Devon and the Earl of Stamford were excepted from subscribing, so they reluctantly desisted. Sir H. Hunloke, a Catholic, is a subscriber, and went in the cavalcade, but was not at church, as you may suppose.

We have a very fine time here, no signs of winter but the absence of leaves; the want of water however is very wonderful, considering the time of year, and is even distressing. I grow very idle and good for nothing; but, such as I am, I remain your very affectionate and much obliged servant,

S. Pegge.

Whittington, Dec. 22, 1788.

Dear Sir,

By this time I hope you are in possession of my Sermon, as I desired my Son to send one copy to you, and another to Mr. Nichols. If I know you, your sentiments in politics coincide with mine; so that I have no fear of your concurrence in that respect and have only to wish that the composition may please you.

I am, dear Sir, your truly affectionate and much obliged servant,

S. Pegge.

Samuel Pegge, Esq. the only surviving Son[50] of the venerable Antiquary whose Life has just been recorded, was born in 1731. After an excellent classical education, at St. John's College, Cambridge, he was admitted a Barrister of the Middle Temple; and was soon after, by the favour of the Duke of Devonshire, then Lord Chamberlain, appointed one of the Grooms of His Majesty's Privy-Chamber, and an Esquire of the King's Household.

Mr. Pegge married Martha, daughter of Dr. Henry Bourne, an eminent Physician, of Spital, near Chesterfield, in Derbyshire[51], and sister to the Rev. John Bourne[52], Rector of Sutton, and Vicar of South Wingfield, co. Derby.

By this lady, who was born in 1732, and died in 1767, he had one son, Christopher, of whom hereafter; and one daughter, Charlotte-Anne, who died, unmarried, March 17, 1793.

Mr. Pegge married, secondly, Goodeth Belt, daughter of Robert Belt, Esq. of Bossall, co. York, by whom he had no issue[53].

After the death of his Father, Mr. Pegge, though somewhat advanced in life, was desirous of becoming a Member of the Society of Antiquaries. He was accordingly elected in 1796; having previously shewn that he was well deserving of that distinction, by the accuracy and intelligence displayed in the "Curialia."

He survived his Father little more than four years; during which period he enjoyed but an indifferent state of bodily health. His mental faculties, however, were, to the last, strong and unimpaired; his manners truly elegant; his conversation always sensible and pleasant; and his epistolary correspondence[54] lively and facetious.

His death is thus recorded on an upright stone on the West side of Kensington church-yard:

"Samuel Pegge, Esq.
died May the 22d, 1800, aged 67 years.

Martha, Wife of Samuel Pegge, Esq.
died June 28, 1767, aged 35 years.

Charlotte-Anne, the only Daughter
of Samuel and Martha Pegge,
died March 17, 1793, aged 31 years.

Mrs. Christiana Pegge died July 1, 1790."

To Mr. Pegge, we are indebted for the foregoing circumstantial Memoir or his very learned Father; and for several occasional communications to the Gentleman's Magazine.

But his principal Work Was intituled, "Curialia; or, an Historical Account of some Branches of the Royal Household[55];" Three Portions of which he published in his life-time:

Part I. consisted of "Two Dissertations, addressed to the President of the Society of Antiquaries, London; viz. 1. On the obsolete Office of the Esquires of the King's Body. 2. On the original Nature, Duty, &c. of the Gentlemen of the King's Most Honourable Privy Chamber, 1782."

Part II. contains "A Memoir regarding the King's Honourable Band of Gentlemen Pensioners, from its Establishment to the present Time, 1784."

Part III. is "A Memoir respecting the King's Body-Guard of Yeomen of his Guard, from its Institution, A. D. 1485; 1791."

During the remaining period of his life, Mr. Pegge amused himself in preparing several other Numbers of his "Curialia" for the press; the materials for which, and also his "Anecdotes of the English Language," he bequeathed to Mr. Nichols; who printed "The Anecdotes of the English Language" in 1803. This Work having been noticed with much approbation in the principal Reviews, and very favourably received by the Publick at large, a Second Edition (corrected and improved from his own detached MSS.) was published in 1814. To this Edition was added, "A Supplement to the Provincial Glossary of Francis Grose, Esq." compiled by Mr. Pegge.

In 1806 Mr. Nichols published Two additional Numbers of the "Curialia:"

Part IV. "A History of Somerset House[56], from the Commencement of its Erection in 1549."

Part V. "A Dissertation[57] on the ancient Establishment and Function of the Serjeant at Arms."

The further continuation of that interesting work was broken off by the melancholy accident mentioned in page v.

In the early part of his life Mr. Pegge was a considerable proficient in Musick. He composed a complete Melo-Drama, both the words and the musick in score, which still remains in MS. Many Catches and Glees also, and several of the most popular Songs for Vauxhall Gardens were written and set to music by him.

His Muse was very fertile; and though his modesty forbade the avowal, he was the Author of some occasional Prologues and Epilogues which were favourably received by the Publick: a Prologue, particularly, spoken by Mr. Yates at Birmingham in 1760, on taking the Theatre into his own hands; an Epilogue spoken by the same excellent Actor, at Drury Lane, on his return from France, and another Epilogue, filled with pertinent allusions to the Game of Quadrille, spoken by Mrs. Yates, at her Benefit, in three different seasons, 1769, 1770, and 1774. He was the Author also of a pathetic Elegy on his own Recovery from a dangerous Illness; and of some pleasant Tales and Epigrammatic Poems.

His other acknowledged writings were,

1. "An Elegy on the Death of Godfrey Bagnall Clerke, Esq. (late one of the Representatives in Parliament for the County of Derby), who died Dec. 26, 1774.[58]"

2. "Memoirs of Edward Capell, Esq."[59]

3. "Illustrations of the Churchwardens' Accompts of St. Michael Spurrier Gate, York," in the "Illustrations of the Manners and Expences of Antient Times, 1797."

4. "On a Custom observed by the Lord Lieutenants of Ireland." (Antiquarian Repertory, Edit. 1809, vol. IV. p. 622.)

5. "Historical Anecdotes of the French Word Carosse." (Ibid. p. 642.)—The two last mentioned Tracts are re-printed in the present volume.

Mr. Pegge also superintended through the Press the greater part of his Father's "History of Beauchief Abbey;" but died before it was completed.

His only Son, the present Sir Christopher Pegge, was admitted a Commoner at Christ Church, Oxford, in 1782; took the Degree of B. A. there in 1786; was elected Fellow of Oriel College in 1788; resigned his Fellowship in 1790, and was re-admitted of Christ Church, having been appointed, through favour of the Dean and Chapter, Dr. Lee's Reader in Anatomy (which situation he resigned in 1816, an asthmatic complaint having rendered change of residence adviseable); took the Degrees of M. A. and M. B. 1789, and that of M. D. 1792. He was elected one of the Physicians to the Radcliffe Infirmary in 1791 (which he resigned in 1803); F. L. S. 1792; F.R.S. 1795; and Fellow of the College of Physicians 1796; received from his Majesty the Honour of Knighthood in 1799, and the Dignity of Regius Professor of Physic in 1801.

Sir Christopher Pegge married, in 1791, Amey, the eldest daughter of Kenton Couse, Esq. of Whitehall; by whom he has issue one daughter, Mary, married in 1816 to the Rev. Richard Moore Boultbee, of Merton College, Oxford (second son of Joseph Boultbee, Esq. of Springfield House, near Knowle, Warwickshire), and had a daughter, born Dec. 9, 1817.

To Richard Gough, Esq.

Whittington, March 17, 1796.

Dear Sir,

There are no persons in the world to whom so much regard is due, respecting my late Father's Collections in the literary line, as to yourself and Mr. Nichols. I daily see obligations, from Books which you have respectively conferred upon him, which call for every acknowledgement. I am as daily concerned in looking over papers of various kinds; and will preserve them all sacredly, and report upon them when I return to Town, which must be in May or June.

I am labouring to keep possession of this house as long as I can, and believe I shall be amply indulged; a circumstance which will enable me to pay every attention to what may be of real use to my Father's Friends: for, as Botanists allow nothing to be weeds, so I admit nothing to be waste paper.

What I write to you I mean should be said to Mr. Nichols, with every kind remembrance. I have only to desire that I may be considered (by descent at least) as

Your obliged Friend,

S. Pegge.

To Mr. Deputy Nichols.

Whittington, March 30, 1796.

Dear Sir,

A peck of March dust is said to be worth a King's ransom;—and to you (who know this house) I may say that I am enveloped in as much dust[60] as would ransom an Emperor. I shall be in Town at the end of May at the farthest, and would wish to work double tides in the History of Beauchief-Abbey while I stay; for I shall find it necessary to pass as long a Summer as I can here, where (by the new Rector's leave) I hope to continue till the approach of Winter.

S. Pegge.

Whittington, April 12, 1796.

Dear Sir,

I am really so much engaged (for I am not half through my Herculean labour) that I have not leisure to think of my late nearest Friend, so as to erect any memorial in the Gentleman's Magazine at present.

I have written to Lord Leicester and to Mr. Topham by this post, to request that I may be hung up, according to Law, at the Society of Antiquaries, in hopes of being honourably cut down, and receiving Christian Burial. The Director[61], I trust, will appear to character when my Trial comes up. God send me a good deliverance! What I write to you, I write to Mr. Gough also through you.

Your obliged Friend, &c.

S. Pegge.

To George Allan, Esq. Darlington.

Whittington, May 2, 1796.

Sir,

In the course of the last year my late Father (Rev. Dr. Pegge) among other Books made me a present off "The Northumberland Household Book;" which he told me (as I since find by his memoranda) was lent to you. I take the liberty of wishing to have it returned soon, directed to my Friend Mr. Nichols.

I have heard my Father often speak of you, Sir, with much respect, and I shall always honour my Father's Friends. I am, &c.

S. Pegge.

Whittington, May 23, 1796.

Sir,

I thank you for the favour of your Letter, which was anticipated by a line from Mr. Nichols, advising me that "The Northumberland Household Book" was safe in his hands. The honourable mention I hear of my late Father, almost every day, is very gratifying to me, though I know it is not undeserved on his part. As to Mr. Brander's Print of my father, I have a very few in London; and one of the best of them shall be at your service. I cannot think the Print in the least like my Father; but I have a Painting[62] which is a very strong resemblance.

Your very obedient humble servant,

S. Pegge.

To Mr. Nichols.

Whittington, July 28, 1796.

Dear Sir,

We left London on Monday the eleventh; but did not make Whittington till last Sunday the 24th inst. We passed part of Wednesday the 13th, and all the 14th and 15th, at Southwell, with the new Rector of Whittington, and had a very pleasurable visit. We next touched at Spital, and as we thought only for three or four days, but were detained there by contrary winds, which blew us into parties of company and venison.

I am, dear Sir, yours very sincerely,

S. Pegge.

York, Sunday, Sept. 11, 1796.

Dear Sir,

Where and when this will find you, whether in Urban or in Sylvan scenes, I know not: but the purport of it is to desire that you would send me (to Whittington) the last Impression of the Family Pedigree of Bourne.

Whether you ever insert it in your Leicestershire or not, I wish to have it completed, as far as may be, from my own connexion with it; and because I know that every difficulty is doubled to every succeeding generation. The Historian of Leicestershire must have had repeated experience of this circumstance in his investigations.

Yours, &c.

S. Pegge.

Scotland yard, Feb. 20, 1797.

Dear Sir,

I am now going seriously to work, to bring the Coins forward by auction. The whole collection amounts in number to between 1100 and 1200; but of what value the hammer must determine.

S. Pegge.

June 10, 1797.

Dear Sir,

Mr. Gough was so obliging as to mention hopes of seeing us at Enfield; and I have been for several days on the point of writing to him a line of thanks, and to express the willingness of the spirit, and the weakness of the flesh; for, alas! I have got as much gout as will last me till we go into Derbyshire in the second week in July. In this situation it would be much to the honour of your humanity to come and pass an evening with us. I am sure to be found at home.

S. P.

Scotland yard, June 18, 1797.

Dear Sir,

I hope this will find you safely returned from your excursion, and disengaged, as I wish you to pass a long evening with me. Mr. Bowyer Nichols would tell you that I am now at leisure to go on with "Beauchief Abbey" for a little while; but without your assistance, know not how. Send me word what evening you can best spare, and bring your Son with you, and let it be very speedily. I shall soon put an end to the Session, and this Printing-ment will be prorogued to the 5th of October, then to meet for dispatch of business.

S. Pegge.

December 7, 1797.

Dear Sir,

As you are connected with the Representatives of Dr. Farmer, or the person who acts for them, I wish you would procure a receipt for a copy of Skelton, which was found in my Father's collection after his death, and which was evidently Mr. Farmer's property.

As I hear that Dr. Farmer's Library is intended for sale, I should be glad that this book might be soon restored to the Executors; and my original wish to return it, may appear from a letter of mine to Dr. Farmer, dated so long ago as the 4th of February last, which has probably been found among his papers. I received no answer to it, which I imputed to his then bad state of health.

Yours, &c.

S. Pegge.

Harrowgate, Aug. 25, 1799.

Dear Sir,

Our history, since I saw you, is briefly this. We left London on the 18th of July, and made a journey of three days to Spital, near Chesterfield. After resting there, for as many days, we set off for this place, which we found very full, and made our quarters good at the humblest house we could find; but with the most comfortable accommodations that a very uncomfortable place can afford; and are reconciled to our situation. We dine (en masse) about 20 on the average, keep good hours, and are not pestered with gamblers, ladies-maids, or lap-dogs. In some houses they dine 120 people!!!

The water of this place is a very strong sulphur, and I believe, is the most powerful of any in the kingdom. The most quiet of this sort of houses is much too turbulent for me; besides that it is difficult for one who cannot walk, or even saunter about, as others do, to fill up the chasms between meals, except by reading, which is scarcely practicable here. I find myself, however, tolerably habituated to noise and talk; and as to the art of doing nothing, I have made myself perfectly master of it. As a proof of it, I have been three weeks in writing this letter.

If you ask me how I do? I answer, I don't know at present. I have experienced much non-valescence, and am told con-valescence will follow.

S. Pegge.

Monday, January 27, 1800.

Dear Sir,

The Lady[63] mentioned in the enclosed Article is my Niece, who hopes to open the Ball in the List of Marriages in this Month. I send also an article for the Obituary[64], the death of a Brother of my Wife, and whose death has long been expected. I am a lodger in my own first-floor, with some gout, which will neither lead nor drive; but I should be very happy to receive a charitable visit of chat in any evening that you can spare. I do not ask Mr. Bowyer Nichols, as I cannot encounter more than one person at a time.

Your very sincere friend,

S. Pegge.

March 17, 1800.

Dear Sir,

Presuming that you are returned from Hinckley, and have nothing in the world to do, I hope you will give us your company in an evening very soon; for at that time of the day I see nobody else. Let me hear by one of your Representatives in Parliament[65] on what evening I may expect you, that I may rectify my spirits accordingly.

Adieu!

S. Pegge.

OR,

THE HISTORY

OF THE

ROYAL HOUSEHOLD.

————

I was led into the following investigation from a natural and kind of instinctive curiosity, and a desire of knowing what was the antient state of the Court to which I have the honour, by the favour of his Grace William the late Duke of Devonshire, to compose a part. It is obvious to suppose that so large a body must have undergone various revolutions, and have borne very different complexions according to times and circumstances: and having occasion to consult some MSS. in the Lord Chamberlain's Office, by his Lordship's permission, upon a matter of no consequence to relate, I thought I discerned, in the course of my search, that materials were to be found sufficient to furnish out a detail. Having free access to the use of a large Library, and by the favour of many friends, to whom I take this opportunity of testifying my obligations, I was enabled to trace back the state of the Court in darker ages, though but by a glimmering light.

Notwithstanding ample revenues have always been provided for support of the dignity and splendour of the Royal House of the Kings of England, equal, if not perhaps superior, to those of any Court in Europe, yet we shall find they have varied very much in different Reigns, as times and circumstances have required; though not always for laudable reasons. Some of our Kings have been so profuse, that, either from their extensive liberality, or more frequently worse inducements, they have thereby lessened the estates of the Crown so very much, that retrenchments, either in the number or expence of their Households (and sometimes both) have become the necessary consequence. Others[66] have found the Crown Revenues so much contracted at their Accession, that they have been obliged to demand resumptions of grants made by their immediate Predecessor, in order to enable themselves to support the Regal dignity with a proper degree of splendour. Others[67], again, from a wanton spirit of prodigality, have rendered it necessary for them to resume even their own grants; a measure equally scandalous to the character of the Prince, as derogatory to the honour of the Crown.

As to resumptions, several of each sort will be seen in the following sheets, antecedent to the Reformation; and since that period there have been repeated occasions for reductions (ex necessitate rei) in the tumultuous reigns of Charles the First, Charles the Second, and James the Second.

When we speak of the superior magnificence of our own Court, we may add, that no other makes so liberal appointments to its Officers, could we know the Establishments of the rest.

In France they figure away with thousands of livres per annum; but, when these come to be liquidated into pounds sterling, the idea is lost, and the appointment of a Lord of the Bed-chamber sinks down into a salary not superior to our Gentlemen Ushers.

In Poland the Officers of the State and Household have no salaries nor fees[68]; but are content with the honour, unless the King chose to reward them with a Starostie, a kind of Fiefs inherent in the Crown for this purpose.

At the Court of Turin, the salaries of the Officers of the Court are extremely small, and every way inadequate to their rank. Frugality and œconomy, exercised in a Royal manner, are the characteristics of that Court; insomuch as that, if the Officers of State had not an income arising from their patrimony, their salaries would not afford them food and raiment[69].

The Emperor of Germany has one very singular prerogative, very inconvenient to the inhabitants of Vienna, that of taking to himself the first floor of every house in the City (a few privileged places excepted) for the use of the Officers of his Court and Army; so that, on this account, says my Author[70], "Princes, Ambassadors, and Nobles, usually inhabit the second stories; and the third, fourth, and even fifth floors (the houses being large and high) are well fitted up for the reception of opulent and noble families." The houses being so large, a single floor suffices for most of the principal and largest families in the City.

For particulars relative to the Court of Denmark, it may be sufficient to refer to the account given by Lord Molesworth, who resided several years as Envoy Extraordinary from King William III.

After that great Revolution called The Conquest, it is to be supposed that a competent part, and that no inconsiderable one, was allotted for the support of the Dignity of the King's House. How large the establishment of the Household was, it would be very difficult to ascertain at this distance of time; but we know that the Conqueror's Revenues were very great, and that, besides the public branch of it for the defence of the Kingdom against invasions from abroad, there must have been an ample residue to maintain the Court in dignity and magnificence at home. William, as soon as he was seated on his new Throne, was careful to make a general and accurate Survey of the whole kingdom, notwithstanding there had been a Survey taken within less than 200 years by King Alfred, then remaining at Winchester.[71] But William's jealous caution did not permit him to trust to this. He saw the necessity there was to make the most of things; and, looking on money as a necessary means of maintaining and increasing power, he accumulated as much as he could, though rather, perhaps, from an ambitious than a covetous motive; at least his avarice was subservient to his ambition; and he laid up wealth in his coffers, as he did arms in his magazines, to be drawn out on proper occasions, for the defence and enlargement of his dominions[72].

In William's Survey, which we call Domesday Book, particular attention was first paid to the King's right; and the Terra Regis (as it was called), which consisted of such lands as either had belonged to the Crown, or to the King individually, was placed first; and, upon the whole, 1422[73] manors, or lordships, were appropriated to the Crown; besides lands and farms, and besides quit-rents paid out of other subordinate manors. Whether William assumed to himself and the Crown more than he ought, is hard to say; but it is to be supposed he was not very sparing or delicate. The Terra Regis is said to have consisted of such lands as Edward the Confessor was found to have been possessed of, the alienation of which was held impious; to which some think William added the forfeited estates of those who opposed him at the decisive battle of Hastings[74]; and likewise the lands of such Barons, and others, who afterwards forsook him. These advantages he might, perhaps, be glad to take, as they enabled him better to reward his Norman friends and followers, who were numerous; and furnished him likewise with a plea to enrich himself, by annexing part of such lands to the Crown, and distributing the rest, with a reservation of quit-rents and services. We may add to these, many apparently unjustifiable means which the Conqueror used to enrich himself, though by the greatness of the antient Crown-estate, and the feudal profits to which he was legally entitled, he was already one of the richest Monarchs in Europe. The Saxon Chronicle says, he omitted no opportunity of extorting money from his subjects upon the slightest pretext, and speaks of it as a thing of course[75]. It must be owned, however, (says Lord Lyttelton) that, if his avarice was insatiably and unjustly rapacious, it was not meanly parsimonious, nor of that sordid kind which brings on a Prince dishonour and contempt. He supported the dignity of the Crown with a decent magnificence; and, though he never was lavish, he was sometimes liberal[76].

Thus did the Conqueror leave an ample and splendid revenue to his Successor, sufficient to maintain his Court in dignity and magnificence, and adequate to every expence both foreign and domestic. It is, at this day, almost impossible to discover the nature and magnitude of William's Household; but most probably, as it was numerous, it was likewise magnificent; though, perhaps, composed of Officers and Offices very different from what have been adopted in succeeding Reigns.

We read of Treasurers, for such a King must have: and in the next Reign mention is made of Robert Fitz-Hamon, Gentleman of the Bed-chamber[77], who conquered Wales, while William Rufus was engaged in a war with Scotland, anno 1091; and we afterwards read of other Officers similar to what we have at present, though the rudeness of the times rendered most of the offices now in being unnecessary, which seem to have been added from time to time, as luxury and refined necessity required, and in conformity to the pride and ostentatious spirit of the Prince who erected them.

It is probable, however, that what was wanting in parade, was equalled by an expence in hospitality, which must, of course, employ a great many Domestics of different kinds in their several departments, to which we may suppose were added many of a Military nature, which the situation of the Conqueror rendered necessary in his new dominion.

There being but few Placemen in those times, the Court was chiefly composed of Ecclesiastics, Barons, Knights, and other Military Gentlemen, led by the hopes of preferment or promotion; and Lord Lyttelton says, William was always liberal to his Soldiers and to the Church[78]. The Barons were, at this time of day, the chief Council of the Realm; they held their Baronies of the King, for which they were perpetually doing homage; and on these accounts the Court must have been crowded,—at least much frequented.

As to the internal part of the Court, I mean the Attendants on the Royal person, we know but very little. King Alfred, however, who lived 200 years before the Conquest, during his attention to the Police of his Kingdom in general, did not forget the internal good government of his Household; for we learn from Ingulphus[79] that he divided his Attendants into three classes, who were appointed to wait by turns, monthly.

Whether this mode was continued by his Successors, I do not learn. William might perhaps reject it as being Saxon, and adopt a plan similar to the French Court, in compliment to his Norman adherents. This routine of waiting, not much unlike the present mode, rendered the service of Alfred's attendants both œconomical, and agreeable to themselves. Sir John Spelman, in his Life of King Alfred, supposes that the Officers who are now called Quarter-waiters are, from their title, a relique of this mode of waiting established by Alfred. But this (with deference to the Gentlemen of that Corps) seems to be going too far, and does not agree with Ingulphus, from whom Sir John takes his account; who says, that the Officers of King Alfred's Household were divided into three classes, and that each class waited alternately monthly, not quarterly; so that no one class waited two consecutive months, and each would, of course, wait four months in the year, with an interval of two months between each wait. It is true, they would renew their waiting once in a quarter of course, from the number of classes, but no part of them attended for a quarter together; and I apprehend the Quarter-waiters received their name because they waited a quarter of a year at a time by turns, as their superiors, the Daily-waiters, waited daily by turns. Alfred's Household most resembled the Gentlemen Pensioners in the mode of attendance, who, to this day, wait in classes quarterly.

I shall now give Sir John Spelman's account at large (as I have Ingulphus's), where he gives a supposed, and not improbable, reason for this mode of attendance.

"He [Alfred] having, it seems, observed the course that Solomon took in preparing timber at Lebanon for the Temple, where thirty thousand, assigned to the work, went by ten thousand at a time, wrought there a month, and then returning, stayed two months at home, until their turn in the fourth month came about again[80]—he, applying this to his own occasions, ordained the like course in his attendance, making a triplicate thereof, insomuch that he had a three-fold shift of all Domestic Officers; each of which were, by themselves, under the command of a several Major-domo[81], or Master of the Household, who, coming with his servants under his charge, to wait at Court, stayed there a month, and then returning home, were supplied by the second ternary, and they again by the third, until the course coming about, the first of them (after two months recess at home) did, with the quarter[82], renew their monthly service at the Court. I should conjecture (continues he) that the King, for his more honourable attendance, took this course in point of Royalty and State, there being (as it then stood with the State) very few men of quality fit to stand before a King, who, by their fortunes or dependency, were not otherwhere besides engaged; neither was there, in those times, any great assurance to be had of any man, unless he were one of such condition, whose service, when the King was fain to use one month in the quarter, it was necessary for the common-wealth that he should remit them the other two months unto their own occasions. Neither used he this course with some of his Officers only (as there are those who understand it to have been a course taken only with those of his Guard), but with all his whole attendance; neither used he it for a time only, but for his whole life; and I little doubt but that the use at Court, at this day, of Officers, Quarter-waiters, had the first beginning even from this invention of the King[83]."

The Translator of this Life of Alfred into Latin, Dr. Obadiah Walker, has taken a little latitude in the last sentence of this passage, and has wandered totally from the mark. His words are, "Neque multum dubito quin Dapiferi hodierni (quos Quarter-waiters appellamus) qui per singulos anni quadrantes, Regi ad mensam ministrant, ab hoc Regis instituto, manarint." Now it is pretty certain that the Quarter-waiters are not Officers at all connected, by their post, with the King's table, they being a secondary degree of Gentlemen Ushers, called in a grant of Fees temp. Car. I. (in Rymer's Fœdera) Ante-Ambulones. The Doctor seems, by the word Dapiferi, to have confounded them with the Sewers; which is strengthened by the following words, "qui ad mensam ministrant."

It is allowed that King Alfred enlarged his Household very much; but, what was the nature and office of the individuals of it, we shall probably never be able to gather. We may, however, fairly suppose his Retinue in number, and his Court in splendour, was far superior to those of any of his Predecessors.

Of the Conqueror's Court we know still less, neither do I learn that King Alfred's establishment was followed by his immediate successors; but it is reasonable to suppose that the Court, as well as the Kingdom, would be new-modelled, and assume a different face, upon so great a revolution as that of the Conquest.

Notwithstanding the fair inheritance left by the Conqueror, equal to the Regal Dignity, and the exigences of the State, William Rufus, the successor, not only dissipated the great treasure of which he was possessed at the demise of his Father, but ran into so extravagant a profusion of expence, that he was at last obliged to apply to resources, unwarrantable in themselves, and derogatory to his Crown and Dignity. The late King's treasures were said to amount to 60,000l.; but, according to Henry of Huntingdon[84], who lived very near the time, to 60,000 pound weight of silver, exclusive of gold, jewels, plate, and robes; and "the silver money alone (says Lord Lyttelton[85]), according to the best computation I am able to make, was equivalent at least to nine hundred thousand pounds of our money at present:" but this would not suffice; for the Crown-lands, which were held so sacred by his ancestors, were alienated; and he was at last compelled, as a dernier resort, to resume his own grants, a practice now used for the first (but not the last) time, and a measure equally scandalous and iniquitous. Rufus's ordinary revenues did not probably exceed those of his Father; but, as he ran into more needless and wanton expenses, he was necessitated to make frequent demands upon his people. Considering the influence of artful Churchmen, in those times of Papal tyranny, over weak Princes, it is not to be wondered that Rufus should be easily prevailed upon by Ranulphus, Bishop of Durham[86], who was Master both of his Councils and his Conscience, to resume his own grants, though made for valuable considerations; or to take any measure, however unwarrantable and unprecedented—

"Tantum Religio potuit suadere malorum."

Amongst other acts of rapacity, made in a manner necessary by his former profusion, he kept the See of Canterbury vacant four years (upon the death of Lanfranc), that he might take the profits to his own use; nay, he did the same by the Bishoprick of Lincoln, and all others that became void in his Reign; and at the time of his death he had in his hands the Sees of Canterbury, Winchester, Salisbury, twelve[87] rich Abbeys, besides many other Benefices of less consideration[88]; so little regard has ever been paid to things sacred by Arbitrary Princes (as our Kings were at that time) to gratify either their necessities or their passions. But this was not the worst part of the story; for, not satisfied with the First-fruits, to which he was entitled,—after he had seized the vacant Benefices, and pillaged them of every thing valuable (even to the very Shrines), he sold them publicly to the best bidder, without regard to merit or capacity[89].

After having been led, by the nature of the subject, to speak thus freely of this King's rapacity, it is but justice to mention an instance of his generosity. It is related that, two Monks striving to outbid each other for a rich Abbey, the King perceived a third standing by, who did not bid any thing; to whom the King addressing himself, asked "how much he would give?" The Monk replied, "he had no money, and, if he had, his conscience would not suffer him to lay it out in that manner:" upon which the King swore his usual oath[90] "that he best deserved it, and should have it for nothing[91]."

Though William was thus continually filling his coffers with these dishonourable and sacrilegious spoils, yet was he avaricious without frugality, covetous and prodigal at the same time; always in want, and devising new ways to raise money, however mean and despicable. I cannot omit one artful and almost ludicrous method which Rufus practised to raise money, in the war with his brother Robert, who had engaged the French in his interest. "Under pretence (says M. Rapin, from Simeon Dunelmensis, Matthew Paris, &c.) that there was occasion for supplies of men, William Rufus [then in Normandy] sent orders into England, to raise, with all possible speed, 20,000 men. In raising this army, such were purposely taken for soldiers who were well to pass, or to whom it was very inconvenient to leave their families. When these levies were going to embark, the King's Treasurer told them, by his order, "that they might every man return home, upon payment of ten shillings each." This news was so acceptable to the soldiers, listed thus against their wills, that there was not one but who was glad to be dismissed at so easy a rate. By this means William raised the sum of 10,000l. with which he bribed the French to retire. Various other instances of extortion and rapacity (though not attended with so much ingenuity as this) might be adduced from the history of this Reign, recorded by contemporary writers; but enough has been mentioned to convince us that but little order or decorum is to be expected within the walls of the Court of so unprincipled a King. On the contrary, indeed, all writers agree[92] in their accounts of the dissolute manners of his Household and Adherents, which called forth rigid edicts in the next Reign, for the suppression of vices which had grown too flagrant to be removed by reprobation alone. The crimes laid to the charge of his retinue were, some of them, of the most serious nature, and required an uncommon exertion of severity; as we shall see presently. "In the magnificence of his Court and buildings, however, (says Lord Lyttelton[93],) he greatly exceeded any King of that age. But though his profuseness (continues his Lordship) arose from a noble and generous nature, it must be accounted rather a vice than a virtue; as, in order to supply the unbounded extent of it, he was very rapacious. If he had lived long, his expences would have undone him, and they had brought him some years before his death into such difficulties, that even if his temper had not been despotic, his necessities would have rendered him a Tyrant.

After so bad an œconomist (to say no worse of William Rufus), we may hope to see a more prudent direction of the revenues of the State, and a less abandoned Retinue about the Royal Person. This is, however, no great compliment to Henry, who succeeded: for a moderate character will appear with some degree of lustre, after one so very much disfigured as that of Rufus. Henry had, without question, many good qualities. He was a wise and prudent Prince, and, as the Saxon Chronicle says, "magno honore habitus[94];" but yet, we shall discover, one of his ruling passions was avarice, when we come to look nearly into his interior conduct in life. There was a glaring inconsistency in his very outset; for, soon after his accession, we find him punishing and imprisoning the abettors of William Rufus's exactions, and, among the rest, Ranulph Bishop of Durham, the Minister and instrument of all those oppressive and unwarrantable measures; and yet, very soon after, we behold Henry sequestering to his own use the revenues of the Archbishopric of Canterbury, and keeping them in his hands for five years, after the example of the very man whose rapacious conduct he had, but just before, publicly condemned[95]. It is true he recalled many grants bestowed upon creatures and undeserving persons in the late Reign; but whether upon motives of justice or avarice I do not determine. It will be found that he died exceedingly rich for those times (by whatever means the wealth was amassed); for he did not omit any opportunity of taxing his subjects, where he could do it with a tolerable grace, though he did it not in so bare-faced a manner as Rufus had done. Thus he availed himself of an antient Norman feudal custom, on occasion of the marrying his eldest daughter[96]. This custom was not now first established by Henry himself, as some have supposed[97]; but was one of the antient aids due to the King from his subjects, and having lain dormant many years, was now revived, but not introduced otherwise, than that Henry happened to be the first King, of the Norman race, who married his eldest daughter. In this he might be justifiable enough; but then he seems to have laid the tax at a prodigious high rate, for it is said, by some calculations, to have amounted to upwards of 800,000l. sterling. Among other things, Henry was very attentive to the reformation of abuses and irregularities that had crept into the Court during the Reign of his Brother.

The accounts given of William's Court are surprizing for that age, when one would suppose our ancestors to have been rough and unpolished, little addicted to the softer vices, and totally unacquainted with the effeminacies of succeeding times; but we find that, notwithstanding men's minds were then so much turned to war and athletic diversions, excess and sensuality prevailed in a very scandalous manner among the Nobility, and even among the Clergy. Vanity, lust, and intemperance, reigned through the whole kingdom. The men appeared so effeminate in their dress and manners, that they shewed themselves men in nothing but their attempts upon the chastity of women[98]. So William of Malmsbury, speaking of the effeminacy of William Rufus's Court, says, "Mollitie corporis certare cum fœminis—gressum frangere—gestu soluto—et latere nudo incedere, Adolescentium specimen erat: enerves—emolliti—expugnatores alienæ pudicitiæ, prodigi suæ." By many evidences it appears that a luxury in apparel was very general among the Nobles and Gentry of that age; even the Nuns were not free from it.

The garments of the English, before their intermixture with the Normans, were generally plain; but they soon adopted the fashions of these new-comers, and became as magnificent in their dress as their fortunes could bear[99]. So that we see the French have, ever since the Conquest, been the standard of the English dress; and though we often complain of the folly of our times, in adopting French modes, it appears to be a practice that has existed time immemorial. Lord Lyttelton informs us (from Ordericus Vitalis) that there was a revolution in dress in William Rufus's reign, not only in England, but in all the Western parts of Europe; and that, instead of close coats, which till then had been used, as most commodious for exercise and a military life, trailing garments with long sleeves, after the manner of the Asiaticks, were universally worn. The men were also very nice in curling and dividing their hair, which, on the fore-part of their heads, was suffered to grow very long, but cut short behind[100];—a style of head-dressing, which, if introduced now, would spoil all the Macaroni's of the age; for their comfort, however, it may be inferred from hence that similar beings have long subsisted in some shape or other.

To return to Henry. We find the reformation of his Court was one of the first steps towards ingratiating himself with his subjects. The Courtiers, for the most part, sure of impunity, were wont to tyrannize over the people in a shameful manner. Not content with every species of oppression, and of secretly attempting the chastity of women, they gloried in it publicly. To remedy these disorders in his Court, Henry published a very severe edict against all offenders in general, and particularly against Adulterers; and such as abused their power by oppressing the people, he ordered to be put to death without mercy. Some who were already notorious on that account were banished the Court, among whom was Ranulph Bishop of Durham, who was likewise imprisoned by the advice of the great Council of the Kingdom[101]. This was in the first year of Henry's Reign; but it had so little effect, that five years afterwards we find a second reformation; for, the former proclamation being ineffectual, it was necessary to publish another, with still greater penalties; and this severity was unavoidably necessary, to check the licentiousness that had crept in, from the connivance which offences of every kind had hitherto met with.

Thus, we see, the dissoluteness of William Rufus's Court did not die with him; nor is it an easy thing to subdue so many-headed a monster as Vice in power. When the Magnates set bad examples in Courts, the inferior Officers are always ready to ape them; and crimes that in the commission are common to all men very soon descend from the Prince to the Page. In the King's progresses during the late Reign, the Court and its Followers committed many outrages of a very serious nature, in places where they lodged; such as extorting money from the hosts who entertained them, and abusing the chastity of women without restraint. But now the grievance was become much worse; for Henry's Attendants, in his progresses, plundered every thing that came in their way; so that the country was laid waste wherever the King travelled; for which reason people, when they knew of his approach, left their houses, carrying away what provisions they could, and sheltering themselves in the woods and bye-places, for fear their provisions should be taken away by the King's Purveyors[102]. These things called loudly for redress: it was therefore made public, by the King's command, that whoever, belonging to the Court, spoiled any goods of those who entertained them in these progresses, or abused the persons of their hosts, should, on proof, have their eyes put out, or their hands and feet cut off[103]. To us these seem cruel and unwarrantable punishments; but it must be remembered that, at this day, punishments were not prescribed, but arbitrary; there was no common law, and but little statute-law, and nothing to regulate the hand of Justice, which was directed by caprice, and the temper of the reigning King. Coiners of false money were grown so numerous and bare-faced, employed and even protected by the great men about the Court, that this kind of imposition on the publick became, among the rest, an object of redress, and the penalty inflicted was the loss of eyes and genitals.

Taking the whole together, one must conclude that the profligacy, and wanton cruelty, of the King's Suite must have been very enormous, to have required punishments so repugnant to natural mercy;—but we can but ill judge, at so distant a period, of the necessity there might be for such severity.

The Kings, in these ages, moved their Court very frequently, and often to considerable distances; and, as the state of the roads would not permit them to travel far in a day, they were forced to accommodate themselves as well as they could at such houses as lay convenient, there being then no receptacles of a public nature. These motions of so large a body of people, added to the frequency of them, were often, of themselves, very oppressive to the Yeomanry, who were obliged to supply the Court with carts and horses from place to place; and the abuse the people sustained in this kind of Purveyance was the occasion of edicts afterward to restrain any from taking carriages from the subject, for this purpose, except by the persons authorized and appointed to the office, who were called the King's Cart-takers, a post which is now in being, though out of use. But, although the Court was not fixed in these times, yet the Kings generally kept the Feast of Christmas in one place[104], according to their liking or convenience. The other Feasts they kept at different places, as it happened, they having Palaces almost at every considerable place in the Kingdom, viz. besides London and its environs, at York, at Gloucester, Winchester, Salisbury, Marlborough, Bath, Worcester, and many other places, too numerous to mention nominatim. The great Feasts (together with that of St. George, after the institution of the Order of the Garter,) were kept with great solemnity, even so late as the Reign of King ... when the public observance of them was dropped by the King and Court.

Henry was not wanting in splendour and magnificence on these occasions. Eadmerus, speaking of one of them, and more might be produced, says, "Rex Henricus [in Festivitate Pentecostes] curiam suam Lundoniæ in magnâ mundi gloriâ, et diviti apparatu celebravit." Wherever the King kept his Court, or indeed wherever he resided, there was, of course, the general resort of all the great men of the time, who brought with them, no doubt, large retinues; and in so great a concourse it is no wonder there should be many disorderly and abandoned people, in spite of all edicts and penalties.

Hitherto I have met with very little mention of any Officers of the Court or Household. In this Reign, however, we hear of William de Tankerville, whom Lord Lyttelton calls, "Henry's Great Chamberlain." The Annotator on M. Rapin calls him only Chamberlain; and Matthew Paris, Camerarius; but this unquestionably means Treasurer, or High Treasurer, and not the great Officer we now understand by the Chamberlain, or the Great Chamberlain. The Latin term for these is Cambellanus, which Du Cange says, is—"diversus à Camerario, penes quem erat cura Cameræ seu Thesauri Regii—Cambellano autem fuit cura Cubiculi[105]. We have the term Chamberlain, in the sense of Camerarius, still preserved in the City of London, where the Treasurer is called the Chamberlain, and the office the Chamber; and indeed this Officer, of every Corporation, is, for the most part, called the Chamberlain. In the account given by the Saxon Chronicle[106] of the persons who were so unfortunately drowned with Prince William, King Henry's son, in returning from Normandy, in the year 1120, it is said there perished "quamplurimi de Regis familiâ, Dispensatores[107], Cubicularii[108], Pincernæ[109], aliique Ministri;" indeed all who were on board perished, except one man. These, it is supposed, were all menial and inferior Officers of the King's Household; those of a higher rank, and who appertained to the King's person, probably being on board the same ship with himself.

Stephen, at his accession, found in his Uncle's Treasury upwards of 100,000l.[110] besides plate and jewels, the fruits of Henry's rapacity and oppression. As Stephen came in upon a doubtful title, the people were willing to take this opportunity of securing themselves against future usurpations and exactions; and accordingly, after some debate about the succession, when Stephen was placed on the throne, they imposed a new oath upon their new King; which imported, that he should fill the vacant Bishoprics, that he should not seize the Woods which belonged to private persons, upon frivolous pretences, as his Predecessors had done; but be content with the Forests which belonged to the two Williams, and make restitution of such as Henry had usurped. The Bishops, on the other hand, took a conditional oath, that they would pay allegiance no longer than he should continue to maintain the privileges of the Church. All this, and more, Stephen afterwards confirmed by Charter; but yet it tended only to amuse the people, till he was fully seated in his Throne, and felt himself a King; for, not many months after the signing the Charter, wherein he particularly covenants not to meddle with vacant Bishoprics, do we find that, upon the death of the Archbishop, he seized the revenues of the See of Canterbury, and kept them in his hands above two years. It is true, he only followed the examples of his Predecessors; but with this aggravation, that Stephen had given the most sacred engagements that can be had between men, that he would not intermeddle with the revenues of the vacant Bishoprics, but that they should be sequestered in the hands of Ecclesiastics till the vacancy was filled. No wonder then that a King, with so little regard to every tie, however sacred, should soon be involved in tumultuous scenes of disaffection and revolt. To heal this wound, and to buy off the reproaches of his subjects (of whose assistance he foresaw he should soon have occasion, in growing ruptures with neighbouring Powers), he not only became lavish of titles and honours, but alienated many of the Crown lands, to secure the interest of such as he thought might be serviceable to him. But this bounty had not the desired effect: some who accepted his favours thought them no more than their due; others, who were passed by, became jealous, and thought themselves neglected, and soon shewed their resentment, which proved the source of the approaching troubles. So difficult is it to regain the lost esteem of a brave and spirited people!

One very great error in the politics of the preceding three Kings was, heaping favours and honours on the Normans, to the exclusion of the English; by which the affection of the Natives was warped, the natural security of the Kingdom (the People) divided, and their hearts turned against the King and his Adherents. The filling the Court with Normans, and lavishing honours and estates amongst them, was weakening the attachment of the English to such a degree, that it became eventually out of the power of the latter to support the Royal Family when it wanted protection. Stephen, at his accession, had made large promises to the Barons, to engage them in support of his weak title to the Throne; and had given them strong assurances that they should enjoy more privileges and offices under him, than they had possessed in the Reigns of his Norman Predecessors. These promises (which, perhaps, were never intended to be performed) answered Stephen's end, by securing to him the Crown, and were the sole motive that induced the Barons to concur so warmly in his interest; and the non-performance was the cause of the general revolt that happened in a few years. From the time of Stephen's accession, he had been perpetually reminded by his Courtiers of his large promises, which he was forced to parry by other still larger promises, and often by actual grants, to satisfy those that were most importunate.

Their private resentments were covered with public outside[111]; but most Writers agree that this was only an ostensible excuse for an opportunity to gratify their revenge; and that the true reasons of discontent were, that they did not receive rewards and emoluments equal to their expectations, and Stephen's promises. The greatest after-engagements that the King could devise were not, however, sufficient to secure the allegiance of his Courtiers; every one was grasping at the same posts, the same estates, the same honours. Reason has little weight among such claimants; and it is no wonder that the situation of the parties should kindle a flame that should spread itself over the whole Kingdom.

During so turbulent a period, it is not to be supposed that much attention should be paid to the interior regulation of the King's House or Household; it was probably as much distracted as the rest of the Kingdom. The King being obliged to fly about from place to place, as the exigency of affairs required, there was little time to study State and Magnificence in his Court. In the former part of Stephen's Reign his Court was extremely magnificent, exceeding that of his Predecessors. He held his Court at Easter, in the first year of his Reign, at London, which was the most splendid, in every respect, that had yet been seen in England[112]. One may judge a little of the hospitality of the Court in those days, by the manner of living among the Nobility: for at this time, and many ages after, the great halls of the castles or principal manor-houses of the Nobility and Gentry were crowded with vast numbers of their vassals and tenants, who were daily fed at their cost. And in houses of inferior rank, upon occasions of feasting, the floor was strewed with flowers, and the jovial company drank wine out of gilded horns, and sang songs when they became inebriated with their liquor[113]. This custom of strewing the floor, in those days, was a part of the luxury of the times; and Becket, when he was Chancellor, in the next Reign, according to a contemporary Author[114], ordered his hall to be strewed every day, in the winter with fresh straw or hay, and in summer with rushes, or green leaves, fresh gathered; and this reason is given for it, that such Knights as the benches could not contain might sit on the floor without dirtying their fine cloaths. But even this rustic simplicity was mixed with great magnificence in gold and silver plate[115]. This custom of strewing the rooms extended to the apartments of the Kings themselves in those days; for in the time of Edward I. "Willielmus filius Willielmi de Aylesbury tenet tres virgatas terræ ... per serjeantiam inveniendi stramen ad straminandam cameram Domini Regis in Hyeme et in Æstate Herbam ad juncandam[116] cameram suam[117]." It may be observed, further, that there is a relique of this custom still subsisting; for at Coronations the ground is strewed with flowers by a person who is upon the establishment, called the Herb-strewer, with an annual salary.

But the commotions of this Reign even put a stop to these meetings of the Court and Council[118], and all Royal magnificence was broken down and defaced. Had it not been for the turbulency of the times, Stephen might doubtless have kept a very large Household, and a splendid Court; for, added to the wealth he inherited with the Crown from his Predecessor, he had large revenues, derived from different sources; viz. the demesnes of the Crown, escheats, feudal profits from the demesnes of others, fines, aids, and several others; but the exigency of his affairs, and the situation to which he was reduced with his Barons, obliged him to give largely, and at last to resume what he had before given, the price of the dissembled affection of his Courtiers.

Stephen had liberality, and loved splendour; so that, had he lived in times more favourable to it, he would, probably, have shone with great lustre in his Court and Household, if we may take the Court which attended him in his first year, and the magnificence there exhibited, for a specimen.

King Stephen, being a Foreigner, and an Usurper, might not choose to ask Aids of the people of England, and it does not appear that he did. He had two sons, Eustace and William, both of whom lived to be married, and no doubt were Knights, which, according to the complexion of the times, every person of the least consequence was, though these Princes do not appear to have received that honour in England. King Stephen was unpopular; and being embroiled in domestic wars with his Cousin the Empress Maud, made no demands of aids of this sort of which we are speaking. His two elder Sons died in his life-time; and his third, William, was by Henry II. restored to his titles of Earl of Bolleigne, Surrey, and Mortaine; and dying without issue, was succeeded by his sister Mary, who, after having been Abbess of Ramsey, was married to the second son of Theodoric, Earl of Flanders, who, in her right, was Earl of Bolleigne.

King Stephen, during the internal disquietudes in the Kingdom, was taken prisoner by Maud, the Empress, and afterwards released at the suit of his Son Eustace. It is not said that any sum of money was paid on the occasion, and indeed it will admit of a question whether the Norman aid, allowed for ransom of the King's Person if taken prisoner, would extend to such a domestic war. The Kingdom was divided; and the Title to the Crown suspended, and in such an unquiet hour, it was difficult for the Nation at large to refuse or comply.

Henry at his Accession found himself so contracted in his Royal Revenues, by the imprudence of his immediate Predecessor, Stephen, that some spirited measures became necessary, to enable him to support his dignity equal to the Sovereign of a great Kingdom, and his own wishes.

Henry soon saw that the resumption of several grants made by Stephen was absolutely necessary; and these having been conferred on great and powerful men, the measure must be conducted with firmness and delicacy. In a Treaty made at Winchester, after the close of the Civil Commotions in the late Reign, after Stephen had contented himself that Henry, then Duke of Normandy, should assume the Rights and Power of a King, reserving to himself only the Image of the Royal Dignity, it was stipulated, inter alia, by a separate and secret article, that the King (Stephen) "should resume what had been alienated to the Nobles, or usurped by them, of the Royal Demesne[119]." This article was limited to whatever lands or possessions had belonged to the Crown at the death of King Henry I.; all which were to be restored, except those that Stephen had granted to William his Son, or had bestowed on the Church. Among these resumable gifts were some made by Matilda; for she too, acting as Sovereign, had followed Stephen's example, in giving away certain parts of the Estate of the Crown, to reward her adherents. Add to these, much that had been usurped by the Barons of both Parties, without any warrant, by the licence of the times, on unjustifiable pretences[120]. No article of the Treaty of Winchester was more necessary to be fulfilled than a resumption of all these alienations, which had been neglected by Stephen, indigent as he was; for, had this not been now executed, Henry would have been little better than Stephen, a Sovereign without a Royal Revenue—"Rex et preterea nihil."—His power would soon have vanished; and the Barons, having usurped the Crown Lands, would very soon have contended for the Sovereign Power: and had not Henry exerted the spirit and conduct which he soon shewed, it is more than probable the Government of the Kingdom at this period had sunk into an Aristocracy. Henry, therefore, as soon as he was well and fully confirmed on the Throne, set about the execution of this secret article of the Treaty of Winchester, relating to the alienated lands, which Stephen had neglected. The necessity of this measure, however arduous and disagreeable in itself, appeared in the most glaring colours to Henry; for Stephen's extravagance, and the insatiable demands of his faction, had induced him to alienate so much of the ancient Demesne of the Crown, that the remaining Estate was not (as has been said) sufficient to maintain the Royal Dignity. Royal Cities, and Forts of great consequence, had been also granted away, which could not be suffered to continue in the hands of the Nobles, without endangering the peace of the Kingdom. Policy and Law concurred in demanding these concessions back again. The Antient Demesne of the Crown was held so very sacred, and so inalienable, that no length of time could give a right of prescription to any other possessors, even by virtue of grants from the Crown, against the claim of succeeding Princes[121]. William Rufus made grants, and revoked them at pleasure, to supply his extravagance and ridiculous humour. This was base and unmanly. Henry's resumptions neither impeached his generosity nor his justice. The grants he reclaimed were such as sound policy and the exigencies of the State demanded, being made by a weak Prince in embarrassed situations; as they were all of no earlier date than the Reign of King Stephen, and had not been transmitted down through several generations. Foreseeing, however, that this step would raise much discontent in those who were to be affected by it, who were numerous and powerful, Henry was cautious not to act without a legal sanction, and the approbation of his Council. He therefore summoned a Parliament, wherein almost all his Nobles were present; and having properly laid before them the wants of the Crown, the losses it had suffered, the illegality of the grants, and the urgent necessity of a speedy resumption; obtained their concurrence to it, and proceeded to put it into immediate execution. The vigour of his government was such, that he met with less opposition than he had reason to expect; very near all that had been granted to Laymen, or usurped by them, from the Royal Demesne, was surrendered to him without bloodshed, after a little delay, and some ineffectual marks of reluctance in a few of the greatest Barons[122]. The cause assigned for these resumptions was not a defect in the title of the grantor, nor any unworthiness in the grantee, but the apparent and indispensable necessity of recovering the just and inseparable Rights of the Crown. No distinction was made between the grants of Stephen and Matilda; for that would have carried an appearance of Henry's acting from motives, not of Royal economy and public expediency, but of party revenge; and by this equal and impartial proceeding, he left the adherents of Stephen no reason to complain. In the course of this business, however, Henry was once very near losing his life; for Roger de Mortimer would not submit, which obliged Henry, incensed by his obstinacy, to lead an army against him, with which he assaulted, among others, the castle of Bridgnorth, in Shropshire, which was defended by Mortimer himself. Henry commanded in person, and exposed himself to so much danger, that he would have been infallibly slain, if a faithful vassal (Hubert de St. Clare[123]) who stood by his side, had not preferred the King's life to his own; for, seeing an arrow aimed at Henry by one of Mortimer's archers, he stepped before him, and received it in his own breast. The wound proved mortal, and he expired in Henry's arms; recommending his daughter, an only child, and an infant, to the care of that Prince[124]. It is hard to say which deserves the most admiration (continues my Noble Author[125]) a subject who died to save his King, or a King whose personal virtues could render his safety so dear to a subject whom he had not obliged by any extraordinary favours[126].

Henry, now firmly seated on his Throne, possessed of an ample Royal Revenue, confirmed the Charter of his Grandfather, Henry I; but, not content only to restore good Laws, he enforced a due execution of them. This Reign is so pregnant with interesting events, and shining transactions of a public nature, that it is no wonder Historians are silent as to lesser matters, such as the internal direction of his Court; but there is, I think, little question to be made but that it was magnificent; and as England became in his Reign one of the most powerful States in Europe, one would infer that his Court was likewise equal (at least) to any other in dignity and splendour. He entertained at one time, in his Palace at Westminster, the several Ambassadors of Manuel, Emperor of Constantinople; of Frederic, Emperor of the Romans; of William, Archbishop of Triers; of the Duke of Saxony; and of Philip, Earl of Flanders: an uncommon resort in these days, who, doubtless, were attracted by the power of the King, and both received from, and added, lustre to the brilliancy and magnificence of his Court[127].

Lord Lyttelton, after giving an account of his person and temper, speaking of his munificence, says, he assigned the tenth part of the Provisions of his Household to be constantly given in daily alms to the poor; which one must imagine to have been a very considerable donation, considering the hospitable manner of living in those days. "His own table (continues his Lordship) was frugal, his diet plain, and in his dress he affected the utmost simplicity, disliking all ornaments which might encumber him in his exercise, or shew an effeminate regard to his person." He introduced the Angevin fashion of wearing short cloaks or mantles (contrary to the mode that prevailed in William Rufus's Reign), which he himself had worn from his childhood, and from which he obtained the sobriquet, or nick-name, of Court-Mantle[128]. In this he would soon be followed by his Court, and the People; for it is every day seen how fast the fashions of the Great descend into the remotest parts of the Kingdom. Lord Lyttelton, however, observes, that the long garments introduced temp. Will. Rufus, were not wholly laid aside; so that Henry's fashion did not prevail universally[129]. The use of silk made by silk-worms (the Bombycina) was brought hither from Sicily about this time; there was also a costly stuff at this day in great request here, called in Latin Aurifrisium. What it was called in English, Mr. Camden declares himself ignorant[130]; but supposes it not to mean Embroidery, although, by other testimonies, that was much worn by the Nobility, and was termed in Latin Opera Phrigia, and the corruption seems very easy and allowable. "Whatever it was," says he, "it was much desired by the Popes, and highly esteemed in Italy."

Hitherto I have not been able to learn any thing concerning Henry's Household, or the internal disposition of his Family. He appears himself to have lived in a great degree of familiarity with his Courtiers, whom he honoured with his intimacy; and would frequently unbend, and lay aside the King, and was fond of the desipere in loco. But "his good humour and jocularity," says Lord Lyttelton, "seems to have been sometimes too playful in the eye of the public; and to have carried him into things that were infra dignitatem [131]." In a note on this passage, his Lordship gives a pleasant story, which I shall relate, to relieve the Reader, and certainly cannot do it better than in his Lordship's own words, from Fitz-Stephen's Life of Archbishop Becket. "As the King and Becket, his Chancellor[132], were riding together through the streets of London, in cold and stormy weather, the King saw, coming towards them, a poor old man, in a thin coat, worn to tatters. Would it not be a great charity (said he to the Chancellor) to give this naked wretch, who is so needy and infirm, a good warm cloak? Certainly, answered that Minister; and you do the duty of a King, in turning your eyes and thoughts to such objects. While they were thus talking, the man came near; the King asked him if he wished to have a good cloak? and, turning to the Chancellor, said,—You shall have the merit of this good deed of charity; then suddenly laying hold on a fine new scarlet cloak, lined with fur, which Becket had on, he tried to pull it from him, and, after some struggle, in which they had both like to have fallen from their horses, prevailed. The poor man had the cloak, and the Courtiers laughed, like good Courtiers, at the pleasantry of the King[133]."

King Henry II. in the early part of his life, was in a very doubtful situation with regard to his accession to the Crown of England, which depended upon the success of his Mother, the Empress, against the Usurper, King Stephen. As soon, however, as he attained his sixteenth year, A. D. 1149, he came over into England; and at Carlisle, where his Great Uncle David, King of Scots, then lay, was by him made a Knight, among several others of equal age, at the feast of Pentecost[134], and for which no Aid could be demanded.

His issue, which is all that concerns the matter before us, consisted of four Sons: Henry, Richard, Geoffrey, and John; and three Daughters, Maud, Alianor, and Joan.

It is difficult, in a Reign where the subjects were so loaded with taxations of every kind, and so generally and indiscriminately imposed, to separate any particular charge from the aggregate. Henry was a Prince that would not forego his rights and privileges; and, as his Children were all natives of England, would doubtless avail himself of such laws and indulgences as he found established, and as would operate in his favour on their account. It does not appear, upon the face of common history, that any Aid was paid for the Knighthood of his eldest Son, though I have not the least doubt but that it was comprehended in some of those numerous subsidies, tallages, &c. which he levied, from time to time, on his subjects, for his transfretations (to use a Monkish word) into foreign parts. There is some ground for the surmise that the charge might be enveloped in some of those exactions; for, though there was a national contribution or Aid demanded for the marriage of one of his daughters, yet it does not transpire but in a general Inquisition for the purpose of discoverig what monies had been received, in every County, by the Sheriffs, &c. This was effected by Itinerant Justices, who were dispatched over the whole Kingdom; and, among other articles contained in their general commission, they were directed to inquire—"concerning the Aid to marry the King's Daughter, what was received in every hundred, in every township, and of every man, and who received it[135]." This took place in the year 1170, in the sixteenth year of the King's Reign.

With regard to this King's transfretations, as I have called them, he was not contented with mere feudal contributions in lieu of personal service; but, upon a rupture with France, respecting settlements upon an intended marriage between two Sons of Henry (Henry, the then eldest, and Richard, the then second Son) with two Daughters of France; the King commanded all his Tenants in capite, Earls, Barons, and Knights, to attend him in person, properly prepared with horse and arms, who were to serve a whole year in Normandy at their own charge[136].

To conclude all I have to observe upon the subject of exactions towards the King's expences in foreign wars, when he passed outre-mer; I can but remark one, which fell not a little heavy on the subject, imputable indeed to the religious frenzy of the times, which was occasioned by a joint resolution of Henry of England and Philip of France to go to the relief of Jerusalem, in what is known by the name of the Holy War. These levies were made in the most oppressive manner; every one who did not go in person being taxed to the extent of his property real and personal; and this was not called an Aid, a Subsidy, or a Tallage, but (forsooth!) an Alms[137]. It ought not to be forgotten that those who did go, whether Clerk or Layman, were to have a free pardon of all sins repented of; and their securities were God, St. Peter, St. Paul, and the Pope[138].

The following Reign is too full of the business of the Holy War, with which Richard was, above all men, most infatuated, to afford much matter for our purpose. Henry had, by the good government and direction of his revenues, left behind him great treasures; but these, or ten times as much, would not answer the purpose of his Successor, who ransacked every corner of his Kingdom for money to carry on this work of zeal, which had seized all Christendom, whereby Richard, on the Throne of a great and opulent Kingdom, thought he saw so fair a prospect of reaping honour and renown.

Henry left in his treasury at Winchester more than nine hundred thousand pounds[139], besides jewels, and other valuable things[140]; but this would go but a very little way towards recovering Jerusalem, which had been taken, and was now in the hands of the Saracens. Before the death of Henry, Richard had bound himself in a vow to Philip of France, to join in this undertaking; and every one, ad Regis exemplum, strove either to go in person, or to supply money towards the expence of the expedition. Nothing, however sacred, could withstand Richard, in his schemes to raise money for this purpose. Most of the Crown lands which Henry had, with so much prudence and address, but a few years before, recovered out of private hands, and annexed to the State, were again put up to public sale, to be purchased by such as were able. Every expedient was devised, to create a fund for this enterprize; and among the rest, he obtained of the Pope a power to dispense with the vows of such who had rashly engaged in the Crusade, by which he raised very large sums. The Bishop of Norwich paid him 1000 marks, to be excused. Where he could, he borrowed; and where he could not borrow, he compelled. The people murmured at his oppression, and the alienation of the estates of the Crown; but Richard told them, he would sell London itself, if he could meet with a purchaser. So great, however, was the general infatuation, that he had less difficulty in raising men than money. The Clergy laboured as zealously to procure him soldiers, as he himself had been active in raising subsidies; his army soon became very numerous, and at a cheap rate, for every officer and private soldier provided himself with necessaries. One would think the great wealth that Richard had amassed would have answered all his purposes; but in a few years after, he had occasion for fresh supplies, to carry on a war with Philip of France; not to mention the ransom which was paid for his release, on his being taken prisoner by the Emperor Henry, amounting to 150,000 marks, which were raised for the occasion by his subjects in England. Philip of France had so maltreated Richard, by leaguing himself with his Brother John, and bribing the Emperor to detain him prisoner, that, as soon as Richard returned home, he could no longer deny himself the satisfaction of revenge. His Kingdom was already drained, and little able to furnish out supplies for a war with France; but Richard was resolved, and money must be had at any rate, let the means be ever so dishonourable. For this purpose he revoked all the grants of the Crown lands, which he had made before his expedition to Palestine. The pretext for this was, that the purchasers had enjoyed them long enough to re-imburse themselves out of the profits, and therefore he did them no injury by taking the lands back again. This was one device; the next was, to avail himself of the loss of the Great Seal, by ordering a new one to be made; and obliged all who had commissions under the old one, to renew them, and have them resealed, by which he must have raised a considerable sum[141].

King Richard I. having no child of either sex, there was not an opening for demanding the two common Aids; but the third, in the order they are usually placed, viz. for the ransom of the King's Person, was exercised for the first time in this Reign. Other taxations, heavy and enormous, on frivolous and nugatory occasions, not to our immediate purpose, were copiously extorted from the subject, and even in a shameful manner[142]. If ever the Latin adage, "Quicquid delirant Reges," &c. could be properly applied, it belonged to Richard.

The favourite system of this King was the Holy-War, and his intemperate zeal led to the point before us. Failing in the attempt to recover Jerusalem from the Saracens, he concluded a truce of three years with Saladan their King; and, on his return towards England through Germany, was made prisoner by the Arch-duke of Austria (upon a pretext that he had killed the Margrave Conrade at Tyre); who delivered him into the hands of the Emperor, where he remained a captive full fifteen months, till he was ransomed[143].

The sum demanded for the King's release is generally allowed to have been 100,000l.; though some writers reduce it a third part, and call it 100,000 marks; but, let it be either of them, it was, in those days, a sum not to be raised without the greatest extortion; and I am justified in saying, it was not done without what, eventually, almost amounted to sacrilege[144]. The church was ransacked for plate, which was pretended to have been only borrowed for the moment—but the debt was never repaid.

In the eleventh year of King Henry IV. a certain portion of the customs in the several ports, of subsidies in several ports, of the issues of the hamper [now the Hanaper], and of the profers [sic] of escheators and sheriffs, were, by the King's letters patent, set apart for the expences of his Household. This was done by the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, assembled in the King's Council[145].

In the Reign also of King Edward IV. it was usual for the King to grant to his servants, or ministers, assignments for their salaries, or debts, upon divers officers who were concerned in receiving his revenue; viz. upon Sheriffs of Counties, Bailiffs, or Men [fortè Mayors] of Towns, Collectors of Customs, Subsidies, &c. Upon these assignments the Assignees had Patent-Letters, Tallies of the Exchequer, or Writs of Liberate currant, made forth for their avail; and, in default of payment, they brought actions of debt in the Court of Exchequer, upon such Assignments, Tallies, or Liberates, against the Sheriffs, or other Officers aforesaid; many instances of which may be seen in the fifth year of King Edward IV. in the Placita coram Baronibus, 5 Edward IV. in the Rolls of the Exchequer[146].

The King was wont to distribute his revenue in such manner as he thought fit. He assigned, at his pleasure, part of it to the expences of his Household, and other parts to the expences of either civil government or war[147].

An act done within the verge of the King's Palace was said to be done in præsentiâ Regis. The party offending was tried in the Court held in the Palace, before the Steward and Marshal; and the proceedings there, were styled Placita Aulæ Domini Regis de Coronâ[148].

The Liber Niger Domûs Regis Angliæ[149] [i. e. Edward IV.] contains Orders for his said Majesty's Household, anno 1478; and relates to the following Officers:

A Chamberlain.
Bannerets, or Bachelor Knights, to be Carvers and Cup-bearers (four).
Knights of Household (twelve) to do the Office of Ewerers.
A Secretary.
Chaplains (four).
Esquires for the Body (four).
A Sewer for the King.
Surveyor for the King, i. e. of the Dresser.
Wardrobe.
Gentlemen Ushers of Chamber (four).
Yeomen of the Crown (twenty-four).
Yeomen of Chamber (four).
Wardrobe of Robes.
Wardrobe of Beds.
Grooms of Chamber (ten).
Pages of Chamber (four).
Jewel-house.
Doctor of Physic.
Master Surgeon.
Apothecary.
Barber.
Henxmen. Six Infants.
Master of the Henchmen.
Squires of Household.
Kings of Arms, Heralds, and Pursuivants.
Serjeants at Arms (four).
Minstrels (thirteen).
A Wayte. N. B. This Yeoman (for such
   was his rank) waiteth (i. e. playeth; I
   suppose) at the making of Knights of
   the Bath, watching upon them by night-time
   in the Chapel. Wherefore he hath
   of fee all the watching cloathing that
   the Knights should wear upon [them.]
Messagers (four).
Dean of the Chapel.
Chaplains, and Clerks of the Chapel (twenty-six).
Yeomen of the Chapel (two).
Children of the Chapel (eight).
Clerk of the Closet.
Master of Grammar, to teach the Henxmen and Children of the Chapel.
Office of Vestiary, i. e. Vestry.
Clerk of Crown in Chancery.
Clerk of the Market.
Clerk of the Works.
Marriage of Wards.
Steward of Household.
Treasurer of Household.
Controller of Household.
Cofferer.
Clerks of Green Cloth.

————

Knights and Esquires of the Body.

Item, that all Knights for the Body, Cup-Bearers, and Knight Carvers, Squires for the Body, &c. be put to their attendance, and a book thereof delivered from the King's Highness into the compting-house, for a quarter of a year; the quarters to begin at October, January, April, and July.

Among the provisions, it is said

Knights of the Body, Carvers, and Cup-Bearers, [may have] every of them, two Yeomen sitting in the hall; and for their livery at night, one loaf and an half, and a gallon of ale; one talshed and an half, and three sizes of white lights[150].

Item, that the Marshall, ne Usher of the Chamber, send his rod by any mean person or persons, to pantry, buttery, or cellar, spicery, chaundry, or any other office; but go in his own person. But if he be occupied, so that he may not, then he send such one with his rod, as he will answer for on the morrow, and also that he will breve for, upon pain of six days wages.

Item, that weekly there be warned and appointed by the Huishiers [Ushers] of the Chamber, [those] who shall attend and serve the King for the week next following, that is to say, Carvers, Sewers, Cup-Bearers, Squires for the Body, and others.

Item, that every Lord, Knight, and Esquire, as well Squire for the Body, as other within the Household, wear daily a collar of the King's livery about their nekket (sic) as to them appertaineth, and that none of the said Squires fail hereof, upon pain of losing a week's wages.

Item, that the liveries for All-night, for the King and Queen be set by day-light, from Candlemas to Michaelmas; and in the winter time, to eight of the clock at farthest.

Item, after the King and Queen's liveries delivered as aforesaid, no officer abide in his office, nor resort unto his said office after his departing, without a special commandment of the King or of the Queen; or else by special token from the Steward of the Household, or from the King or Queen's Chamberlains.

Punishment for neglect of Duty.

For the first offence, the party to be warned to amend.

For the second offence, imprisonment at the discretion of his Superior.

And for the third offence, a discharge from his office[151].

cometh to this Court at the six principal feasts of the year; takes such livery and service after the estate he is of; and for his winter and summer robes, for the feasts of Christmas and Whitsuntide, to be taken of the counting-house by even portions, ten pounds thirteen shillings and four pence; and for his fee of the King's Household, at the two terms of Easter and Michaelmas, by even portions, twenty marks in the counting-house.

Twelve Bachelors, sufficient and most valiant men of that order, of every Country, and more in number if it please the King, whereof four to be continually abiding and attending upon the King's Person in Court, beside the Carvers abovesaid, for to serve the King of his bason, or such other service as they may do the King, in absence of the Carvers, sitting in the King's Chamber and Hall with persons of like service; every of them have eating in the hall one Yeoman, and taking for his chamber, at noon and night, one loaf, one quart of wine, one gallon of ale, one pitcher of wine, one candle wax, two candles pis, one tallwood and an half, for winter livery, from All-Hallowen-tide till Easter: rushes and litter all the year, of the Serjeant Usher, and for keeping of their stuff and Chamber, and to purvey for their stuff. Also at their livery in the Country, amongst them all, four Yeomen, after time eight of these Knights be departed from Court, and the four Yeomen to eat daily in the hall with Chamberlains, till their said Masters come again; so that the number of Knights' servants be not increased when their Masters be present. Every Knight shall have into this Court resorting, three persons, Waiters; the remanent of their servants to be at their livery in the Country, within seven miles to [of] the King, by the Herbergers sufficiently lodged; and, if it may be, two Knights together. Also they pay, in this Court, for the carriage of their own stuff. And if a Knight take clothing, it is by warrant made to the King's Wardrober, and not of the Treasurer of Household. Some time Knights took a fee here yearly, of ten marks, and clothing; but because[153] their clothing is not according for the King's Knights, therefore it was left.

Item, if he be sick, or specially let blood, or clystered, then he taketh livery, four loaves, two mess of great meat and roast, half a pitcher of wine, two gallons of ale. This letting blood, or clystering, is to avoid pestilence; and therefore the people take livery out of the Court, and not for every sickness in man continuing in this Court.

Four Noble, of condition, whereof always two be attendant on the King's person, to array him, and unarray him; watch day and night; and to dress him in his cloaths. And they be callers to the Chamberlaine, if any thing lack for his person or pleasance. Their business is in many secrets, some sitting in the King's chamber, some in the hall with persons of like service, which is called Knight's service. Taking, every of them, for his livery at night, half a chet loaf, one quart of wine, one gallon of ale; and for winter livery, from All-Hallowtide till Easter, one percher wax, one candle wax, two candles pric.[154] one talshide and an half, and wages in the compting-house. If he be present in the Court daily, seven-pence halfpenny; and cloathing with the Household, winter and summer, or else forty shillings, besides his other fee of the Jewel-house, or of the Treasurer of England; and besides his watching cloathing of Chamber of the King's Wardrobe. He hath, abiding in this Court, but two servants; livery sufficient for his horses in the country, by the Herberger. And if any Esquire be let blood, or else fore-watched, he shall have like livery with Knights. Litter and rushes all the year, of the Serjeant Usher of the Hall and Chamber. Oftentimes these stand instead of Carvers and Cup-bearers.

In the "Statutes of Eltham."

Esquires of the Body, every of them, to have ordinary within the Court four persons, of the which to have sitting in the Hall two persons, and the residue ut supra [i. e. to have no meat or drink within the House, but to be at board wages in the town]; and for their bouche of Court, every of them to have for their livery at night, one chet loaf, half a pitcher of wine, and one gallon of ale, one size wax, three white lights, two talsheds, and two faggots.

In the appointment of Herbagage be ordinary for all Noble Estates, and others, for stabling of their horses, and beds for their servants, appointed by the King's Highness, at his Manor of Eltham, the 19th of January, in the 17th year of his Noble Reign.

It is appointed to Knights for the Body, and other Knights, six horses and two beds.

To every Esquire for the Body, five horses and two beds.

[N. B. Every Gentleman Usher of the Privy Chamber, whereof six, six horses and two beds.

Every Groom of the Privy Chamber, two horses and two beds.

Every Gentleman Usher Daily Waiter, three horses and one bed.

Every Gentleman Usher of the Privy Chamber, four horses and one bed[155].]

For the good order of the King's Chamber, it is said, the Pages of the King's Chamber must daily arise at seven o'clock, or soon after, and make a fire; and warn the Esquires of the Body of that hour, to the intent they may then arise, so as they may be ready, and the King's Chamber dressed in every thing as appertaineth, by eight of the clock at the farthest.

Item, that none of the servants of the said Esquires come within the Pallet Chamber; but be attendant at the door, as well at night as in the morning, with such gear as their Masters shall wear. And the said Pages, at the request of the said Esquires, to fetch in, and bear out, their night-gear, and all other their apparel, and likewise to make them ready, both at night and in the morning.

Item, that, if the Esquires for the Body do not arise at the warning of the Pages, so as the King's Chamber may be ready and dressed by the hour afore limited; that then immediately the Pages are to shew the same to the Lord Chamberlain.

[In the appointment of Lodgings, is a chamber for the six Gentlemen and Ushers of the Privy Chamber, to sup in; which explains the above article.]

The Esquires for the Body, mentioned to have been at Eltham at that time, were, Sir Arthur Poole, Sir Edward Baynton, Sir Humphrey Forster, and [Mr.] Francis Pointz.

In the New Book of the King's Household of Edward IV. anno 1478:

Six Knights and five Squires appear to have been on duty for eight weeks from the last day of October, at the end of which they were relieved by five Knights and four Esquires. Sir Roger Ray, being Vice Chamberlain, was in both lists; for it is said afterwards, "We will that Sir Roger Ray, Deputy to my Lord Chamberlain, two Gentlemen Ushers, and two Yeomen Ushers, at least, be always attending upon us."

Twenty-four most seemly persons, cleanly and strongest Archers, honest of conditions, and of behaviour, bold men chosen and tried out of every Lord's house in England for their cunning and virtue thereof. One to be Yeoman of the Robes, another to be Yeoman of the Wardrobe of Beds in Household. These two, in certainty, eat in the King's Chamber daily. Other two be Yeomen Ushers of Chamber, eating there also. Another to be Yeoman of the Stole, if it please the King. Another to be Yeoman of the Armory. Another to be Yeoman of the Bows for the King. Another Yeoman to keep the King's Books. Another to keep his Dogs for the Bow. And, except the first four persons, the remnant may to the Hall, as the Usher, &c. or another to keep his best; and thus they may be put to business. Also it accordeth that they be chosen men of manhood, shooting, and specially of virtuous conditions. In the King's Chamber be daily sitting four messes of Yeomen; and all the remnant eating in the Hall, sitting together above, joining to the Yeomen of Household; except at the five Great Feasts of the year, then as many Yeomen of Crown and Chamber as may sit in the King's Chamber shall be served there during the Feast; and every of them present in Court, hath daily allowed in the counting-house three-pence, and cloathing for winter and summer, and ... yearly, or else eighteen shillings, beside their watching cloathing of the King's Wardrobe. And if any of them be sent out by the King's Chamberlain, then he taketh his wages of the Jewel-house, and vacat in the Cheque Roll till he be seen in Court again. Also lodging in the town, or in the country, sufficient for their horses, as nigh together as the Herbiger of Household may dispose; and always two Yeomen of Crown to have an honest servant in to [the] Court, in the Noble Edward's Statutes. And these were called "The Twenty-four Archers de pié courants entièrement devant le Roy par pairs pour Gard [de] Corps du Roy[157]." These were called the King's Watchment. At this [or rather that] day, a Yeoman took but ten shillings for his gown, and four shillings and eight pence for his hosen and shoone. They have nothing else with the Household sans carriage of their beds, two men together, by deliverance or assignment for that carriage of the Controllers, and litter for their beds of the Serjeant Usher of the Hall and Chamber. And if any of them be sick, or let blood, he taketh for all day a cast of bread, one mess of great meat, one gallon of ale; and if it be of great sickness, he must remove out of the Court.

Also, when they make watch nightly, they should be gird with their swords, or with other weapons ready, and harness about them.

To be taking in this Court after that he standeth in degree, Gentleman, Yeoman, or Groom. It hath been much accustomed to one or two well-known Officers of the Ewry in Household, such as been for the month, Serjeant, or other. Also we find how this hath been used among ... by a well-betrusted Yeoman of Chamber, for lack of cunning of these other men. It is accustomed that a Knight of Chamber, or else Squire for the Body, or both, be present every time when the King will be shaven.

This Barber shall have every Saturday at night, if it please the King to cleanse his head, legs, or feet, and for his shaving, two loaves, one pitcher of wine; and the Ushers of Chamber ought to testify this, if this be necessary dispended or no.

Also, this Barber taketh his shaving cloths, basons, and all his other towels[158], and things necessary, by the Chamberlain's assignment, of the Jewel-house; no fees of plate or silver, but it be in his instrumental tools used by occupation, and that by allowance of the King's Chamberlain.

Six infants, or more, as it shall please the King, all these eating in the Hall, and sitting at one board together; and to be served two or three to a mess, as the Sovereigns appoint; taking daily for their breakfasts, amongst them all, two loaves, a mess of great meat, a gallon of ale. Also, for their supper in fasting days, according to their age, and livery nightly for them all to their chamber, one loaf, one gallon of ale; and for winter livery, two candles wax, four candles p'is, three talsheds, for them all. Rushes and litter all the year, of the Serjeant Usher of the Hall and Chamber. And if these Gentlemen, or any of them, be Wards; then, after their births and degrees, the Steward and Treasurer, with the Chamberlain, may appoint the service more large in favour by their discretions, when as often as them needeth, till the King's Grace hath given or sold[159] their lands and wards. And all their competent harness to be carried, and beddings. Two lodged together at the King's carriage, by oversight of the Comptroller; and every of them an honest servant to keep their chamber and harness, and to array him in this Court whilst their Masters be present in Court; or else to allow here no chamber dokyns, &c. And all other findings for their beds they take of the King's Wardrobe, by suit of the Master of Henxmen, made to the King's Chamberlain for warrants.

To shew the schools of urbanity and nurture of England; to learn them to ride cleanly and surely; to draw them also to justs; to learn them wear their harness; to have all courtesy in words, deeds, and degrees; diligently to keep them in rules of goings and sittings after they be of honour. Moreover to teach them sundry languages, and other learnings virtuous; to harping, to pipe, sing, and dance, with other honest and temperate behaving and patience; and to keep daily and weekly with these children due [discipline], with corrections in their chambers, according to such gentlemen; and each of them to be used to that thing of virtue that he shall be most apt to learn, with remembrance daily of God's service accustomed. This Master sitteth in the Hall next unto beneath these Henxmen, at the same board; to have his respects unto their demeanings, how mannerly they eat and drink; and to their communication, and other forms curial, after the book of urbanity. He taketh daily, if he be present in Court, wages, cloathing, and other liveries, as other Esquires of Household, save he is not charged with serving of the Hall. Carriage also for harness in Court competent by the Comptroller to be with the Henxmen his harness in Court; and to have into this Court one servant, whilst he is present; and sufficient liveries for his horses, in the town or country, by the Herberger. And if he be sick in Court, or let blood, he taketh two loaves, two mess of great meat, one gallon ternoise[160]. And for the fees that he claimeth among the Henxmen of all their apparel, the Chamberlain is the judge.

Forty, or more, if it please the King, by the advice of his High Council, to be chosen men of their profession, worship, and wisdom; also to be of sundry Shires, by whom it may be known the disposition of the Countries. And of these, to be continually in this Court Twenty Squires attendant upon the King's Person, in riding and going at all times, and to help serve his table from the Surveying-board, and from other places, as the Assewar will assign.—Also, by their common assent, to assign amongst themselves some to serve the King's Chamber, at one day, week, or time, some to serve the Hall at another time, of every mess that cometh from the dressing-board to their hands for such service, so that thereof be nothing withdrawn by the Squires, upon such pain as Steward, Treasurer, or Controller, or in their absence other Judges at the counting-board, will award, after their demerits.—They eat in the hall, sitting together at any of the both meals as they serve, some the first meal, some the latter, by assent. This hath be [been] always the manner amongst them for honour [and] profit to the King.—It may be, that the King taketh into Household in all Sixty Squires, and yet, amongst them all, Twenty take not the whole wages of the year [sic]; wherefore the number of persons may be received and suffered the better in the checque-roll for a worship, and the King's profit saved, and ease to them self.—Every of them taketh for his livery at night, half a gallon of ale; and for winter season, each of them taketh two candles parris, one faggot, or else half talwode.

When any of them is present in Court, he is allowed for daily wages, in the checque roll, seven-pence halfpenny, and clothing winter and summer; or else forty shillings. It hath ever been in special charge to Squires in this Court, to wear the King's Livery customably, for the more glory, and in worship of this honourable Household: and every of them to have in to this Court an honest servant, and sufficient livery in the towns or countries for their horses, and other servants, by the herberger. Two Gentlemen lodged together, and they be coupled bed-fellows by the Gentlemen Ushers.—And if any of them be let blood or sick in Court, or nigh, thereto, he taketh livery in eating days, two loaves, two mess of great meat, one gallon of ale, for all day, and litter all the year of the Serjeant Usher of the hall for their beds in Court.—And if any of these Squires be sent out of Court, by Steward, Treasurer, or Controller, or other of the counting-house, for matter touching the Household, then he hath daily allowed him twelve pence by petition. Also they pay for their carriage of harness in Court. They take no part of the general gifts, neither with chamber nor with hall, but if the giver give them specially a part by express name or words. None of these should depart from Court but by licence of Steward, Treasurer, or Sovereigns of the Counting-house, that know how the King is accompanied best: and to take a day when they should come again, upon pain of loss of wages at his next coming.—That no Serjeant of Office, nor Squire, nor Yeoman, nor Groom, but as be appointed in this Book, to dine or sup out of Hall and King's Chamber, nor to withdraw any service, or else to hurt or little the almesse [alms] of Hall or Chamber, upon such pain as the Sovereigns of Household will award by the Statutes of Noble Edward III. "In none office, &c."

It hath been often, in days before, commanded by the Counting-house, that in ferial days, after that the King and Queen, and their Chambers, and the Sovereigns of Household in the Hall, be served, that then such honest Yeomen of Household be called or assigned to serve from the dresser to the hall the remnant, specially such as bear wages, that, if any service be withdrawn by them, that then they to be corrected therefor.

These Squires of Household, of old, be accustomed, winter and summer, in afternoons and in evenings, to draw to Lord's Chambers within Court, there to keep honest company, after their cunning, in talking of chronicles of Kings, and of other policies, or in piping or harping, songings, or other acts marriables[161]; to help to occupy the Court, and accompany strangers, till the time require of departing.

"Item, that daily there awaite twenty-four Squires to serve the King and Queen, of whom twelve to serve at the first dinner, and to dine at the second; and the twelve sitting at the first dinner, to serve the second dinner, and there to awaite to serve the King and Queen[162]."

Dom. Regis Angliæ. The Esquires—"oftentimes these stand instead of Carvers and Cup-Bearers[162]."

Coming into this Royal Court to the worship of these five Feasts in the year, sitting at meats and suppers in the Hall, and to begin that one end of the table together, upon days of estate, by the Marshall's assignation, at one meal. And if the King keep estate, by the Marshall's assignation, in the Hall, then these walk before the Steward, Treasurer, and Comptroller, coming with the King's Surveyor[163] from the surveying-board at every course. And, after the last course, they cry the King's largesse, shaking their great cup. They take their largesse of the Jewel-house; and during these Festival-days they wait upon the King's Person coming and going to and from the Church, Hall, and Chamber, before his Highness, in their coats of arms. They take neither wages, cloathing, nor fees, by the Compting-house; but livery for their chamber, day and night, amongst them two loaves, a pitcher of wine, two gallons of ale; and for winter season, if there be present a King of Arms, for them all, one tortays at chandry, two candles wax, three candles p'is, three talsheds. These Kings of Arms are served in the Hall as Knights, service and livery for their horses nigh the Court, by the Herberger.—Alway remembered, that the cup which the King doth create any King of Arms or Herald withal, it standeth in the charge of the Jewel-house, and not upon the Treasurer of Household.

The fees that they shall take at the making of Knights of the Bath, it appeareth next after the chapter of Squires.

Four chosen proved men, of haviour and condition, for the King and his Honourable Household; whereof two alway to be attending upon the King's Person and Chamber; and to avoid the press of people before where as the King shall come: in like wise at the conveyance of his meat at every course from the surveying board; also observing for [of] the King's commandments, and so after the Steward, Chamberlain, Treasurer, and Controller, for the King, or for his Household. They eat in the Hall, together or with Squires of Household, taking their wages of twelve-pence by [the] day, or four-pence, as it pleaseth the King, after their abilities, by letters patents; and clothing also, to be taken of the issue and profit growing to the King in divers counties of England, by the hands of the receivers of them. No more having in Household; but every of them, when he is present in Court, at night, a gallon of ale; and for winter livery, one candle wax, two candles p'is, one talshed; rushes [and] litter for their chamber of the Serjeant Usher all the year. They pay for the carriage of their proper harness and bedding; and every of them to have in to this Court, one honest servant. By the Statutes of the Noble Edward, were thirty Serjeants of Arms, sufficiently armed and horsed, riding before his Highness when he journeyed by the country for a Garde de Corps du Roi. And if any of these be sick, or be let blood, he taketh daily two loaves, two messes of great meat, one gallon of ale, and thus to be brevied in the Pantry-Roll. Also sufficient lodging assigned these Serjeants together, not far from Court, for hasty errands [when] they fall.

Thirteen; whereof one is Verger, that directeth them all in festival days to their stations, to blowings and pipings to such offices as must be warned to prepare for the King and his Household, at meats and suppers, to be the more ready in all services; and all these sitting in the Hall together, whereof some use trumpets, some shalmuse[165] and small pipes, and some are strange-men coming to this Court at five feasts of the year; and then to take their wages of Household after four-pence halfpenny a day, if they be present in Court; and then they to avoid the next day after the feasts be done. Besides each of them another reward yearly, taking [taken] of the King, in the Receipt of the Chequer, and cloathing with the Household, winter and summer, or twenty shillings a-piece, and livery in Court at even—amongst them all four gallons of ale; and for winter season, three candles wax, six candles p'is, four tallow candles, and sufficient lodging, by the Herbergers for them and their horses in the Court. Also having in the Court two servants, honest, to bear the trumpets, pipes, and other instruments; and a torch for winter nights, whilst they blow to suppers, and other revels at Chaundry. And always two of these persons to continue in Court in wages, being present to warn at the King's ridings, when he goeth to horseback, as oft as it shall require. And by their blowings the Household-men may follow in the countries. And if any of these two Minstrels be sick in Court, he taketh two loaves, a mess of great meat, a gallon of ale. They have part of any rewards given to the Household. And if it please the King to have two strange Minstrels to continue in like wise. The King woll not for his worship that his Minstrels be too presumptuous, nor too familiar, to ask any rewards of the Lords of his land, remembering "De Henrico Secundo Imperatore, qui omnes Joculatores suos et ... monuerit ut nullus eorum in ejus nomine, vel dummodo steterunt in servicio suo, nihil ab aliquo in regno suo deberent petere donandum, scilicet, quod ipsi Domini donatores pro Regis amore citius pauperibus erogarent."

That nightly, from Michaelmas till Shere-Thursday[166], pipeth the watch within this Court four times, and in summer nights three times, and he to make bon Gayte, and every chamber-door and office, as well for fire as for other pikers, or pellys[167]. He eateth in the Hall with the Minstrels, and taketh livery at night, half a paine, half a gallon of ale; and for summer nights, two candles p'is, half a bushel of coals; and for winter nights, half a loaf, half a gallon of ale, four candles p'is, half a bushel of coals; and daily, if he be present in Court, by the Cheque Roll, four-pence halfpenny, or three pence, by the discretion of Steward and Treasurer, and after the cunning that he can, and good deserving. Also cloathing with the Household Yeomen, or Minstrels, according to the wages that he taketh. And if he be sick, or let blood, he taketh two loaves, half a mess of great meat, [and] one gallon of ale. Also he partaketh with the general gifts of Household, and hath his bedding carried, and his grooms together, by the Controller's assignment. And under this Yeoman, a Groom Wayte; if he can excuse the Yeoman in his Office, and absence, then he taketh reward and cloathing, meet rewards, and other things, like to the other Grooms of Household. Also this Yeoman wayteth at the makings of Knights of the Bath, watching by night-time upon them in the chapel; wherefore he hath of fee all the watching cloathing that the Knights do wear upon [them].

This Officer was anciently one of the Chancellor's Family[168].

Formerly accompanied the Masters in Chancery in carrying Bills to the Lower House[169].

Reads the Titles of Bills in the House of Lords[170].

Sir George Copping was Clerk of the Crown, anno 1 Jac. I.[171]

The fee of the Clerk of the Crown, in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, was 20l.[172]

Was the first who bore his Escocheon supported; viz. by Two Angels.

Cognizances.—A White Hart couchant, gorged with a Gold Chain and Coronet, under a Tree; derived from the Princess Joan his Mother.

Also a Peascod Branch, with the Pods open, but the Peas out.

Dexter, a Swan. Sinister, an Antelope.

Cognizance.—A Fox's Tail dependant.

Two Swans, when Prince of Wales, holding in their beaks an Ostrich-feather and a Scroll; when King, a Lion and an Antelope.

N. B. He first bore three Fleurs de Lis, instead of the Semée; and wrote himself King of England and France, whereas those before him wrote France and England.

Two Antelopes, Argent, attired, accolled with Coronets, and chained Or.

Cognizance.—Two Feathers in Saltire.

A Lion for Marche; and a Bull for Clare.

Two Lions, Argent.

The Lion and the White Hart of Richard II.

Cognizances.—The White Rose.

The Fetter-Lock.

The Sun after the Battle of Mortimer's Cross, when three Suns were seen, which immediately conjoined.

The Rose is in the centre.

The Lion and a Hinde, Argent.

Cognizance.—The Rose and the Falcon in a Fetter-Lock.

Two Boars.

A White Boar.

i. e. Sir William Catesby, Sir Richard Ratcliff, and Lord Lovel, creatures of King Richard. One Collingborne was executed for this poetry[173].

Cognizance.—The Rose.

Red Dragon (for Cadwallader), Dexter.

A Greyhound, Argent, accolled Gules, Sinister, for Nevile.

Cognizances.—The White Rose united to the Red.

A Portcullis for Beaufort.

A Hawthorn Bush with the Crown in it.

Richard's Crown was found in a Hawthorn Bush after the Battle of Bosworth[174].

The Red Dragon and Greyhound.

Afterwards, the Lion Dexter; the Dragon Sinister.

Cognizances.—A Red Rose.

A Fleur de Lis.

A Portcullis.

An Archer (Green) drawing his Arrow to the Head; with "Cui adhæreo præest." taken at the interview between him and Francis I.

The Lion and Red Dragon.

Cognizance.—He bore the device of Prince of Wales, though never created.

An Eagle and Lion.—These are the Supporters in the Coat of Philip and Mary, impaled, over the chimney in the Hall of Trinity College, Oxford, as of the year 1554, put up 1772, when Lord North, afterwards Earl of Guilford, became Chancellor[175].

Cognizance.—When Princess, the White and Red Rose for York and Lancaster, with a Pomegranate for Spain.—When Queen, Time winged, drawing Truth out of a Pit; with "Veritas Temporis Filia."

A Lion and Red Dragon.

Cognizance.—A Sieve, without a motto.

The words Video; Taceo. Semper Eadem[176].

The Lion (for England), and the Unicorn (for Scotland).

Cognizances.—A Rose; a Fleur de Lis; a Harp (for Ireland); a Greyhound current.

Stowe says that Charlemagne, being chosen Emperor, A.D. 800, on account of his great zeal for the good of Christendom, was the first King of France that attributed to himself (I rather think received from the Pope) the Style and Title of The Most Christian King of France; and from him his Successors have continued it[177].

First given to (or rather assumed by) King James I.[178]—Grace was the old Title.—Majesty succeeded to it at the latter end of the Reign of Henry VIII.[179]

(Spain.)

About the year 1493, Pope Alexander VI. gave to Ferdinand, King of Spain, the Title of Catholick King, in memory and acknowledgment of the many Victories he had obtained over the Moors[180].

As the following subject, which has exercised the faith and incredulity of mankind for so many ages, comes before me in the light of a religious ceremonial, I shall not attempt to defend or depreciate the validity of this gift; though it may be necessary to observe some circumstances as they occur, which may point different ways. Well-attested instances of the effect of this power of healing may be produced; though other examples are too ludicrous and futile to attract serious attention. We may, however, in these enlightened and unsuperstitious times, speak freely on a subject, which for many years, I may say centuries, absorbed the faith of whole Nations; viz. the Cure of the King's Evil by the Royal Touch. As Mr. Addison, in the quality of The Spectator, professed a modest veneration for a couple of sticks, if concealed under petticoats; so am I loyally and religiously induced to "honour the King," as a part of our excellent Constitution: but why Kings should have in themselves a preternatural gift above other men, by healing the most stubborn of all diseases, exceeds my comprehension. Every body is, at this time, I dare believe, of the same opinion; and this foolish affectation of a divine inherent power has wisely been laid aside, ever since the accession of the House of Hanover.

If Kings really possessed such an uncommon, such a wonderful gift, why has it been taken away? The same legal rights remain in the Royal Person now that have adhered to it for ages—while this Divine Prerogative has fallen away; or rather let us say, that the incredulity of the world has increased.

The cases brought forward by the advocates for this Gift are exceedingly strong and well attested; but yet there is something so palpably absurd in the mere supposition, that the evidence, when brought forward, will be found to destroy itself on a cross-examination.

As to the subject, and all its wonderful consequences, I have just as much faith as I have in the two following circumstances:

Lord Bolingbroke tells us, from Bodin, Amyot, and other writers, that Ferdinand King of Spain, and Alphonsus King of Naples, were cured of desperate distempers by reading Livy and Quintus Curtius[181]. Again, there was such astonishing virtue in Quintus Curtius, that we are further told, Alphonsus IX. King of Spain[182] was healed by reading his works, after having in vain read the Bible throughout fourteen times[183]. Credat qui vult. And yet I could as soon subscribe to these, as to the cures performed by the Royal Touch.

Anciently there was great reputed sanative virtue in a seventh son; and he was looked upon as a heaven-born Doctor, and those his medical abilities were reverenced for that reason only by the common people. So far the Doctor would be safe, and might kill with impunity; but it was a crime to heal.

Thus I have a case before me in the Reign of King Charles I. where a poor unfortunate man, who was the seventh son of a seventh son, and never killed any body (for he was a gardener, and not a physician), was severely treated, because he pretended to have in him the faculty of healing several disorders, and especially the King's Evil, by the Touch or stroking of his hand. This man was imprudent enough to depreciate the Royal Touch; otherwise, at that time, he might have obtained a comfortable subsistence from his credulous patients; but that unfortunate intrenchment on the Royal Prerogative drew down upon him the double vengeance of the Court of Star-Chamber, and of the College of Physicians; which last, in the most courtly manner, denounced him to be an impostor[184]. Delenda est Carthago. It was highly necessary for the reputation of the Royal pretensions that this man should be proscribed.

The next person who appears to have usurped this Gift was Mr. Valentine Greatrackes, a gentleman of Ireland, who first practised his art of healing by the Touch in his own country; and afterwards came into England, where, at first, he obtained great reputation, which fell off by degrees, so that there was no occasion for any violent measures to prevent his intrenching on the Royal Prerogative.

This gentleman wrote an account of his several cures, in a Letter to the Honourable Robert Boyle, which was printed in 1668. Whether Mr. Boyle was a believer I know not; but it was at a time when the King practised, so that he might think it prudent to conceal his real sentiments.

How far imagination will operate in such cases, as the old women, even of this age, contend it does in Agues, is a question not for me to discuss; but it tempts me to transcribe the following story, as given by Mr. Granger, vol. IV. p. 32.

"I was myself a witness of the powerful workings of imagination in the populace, when the waters of Glastonbury were at the height of their reputation. The virtues of the spring there were supposed to be supernatural, and to have been discovered by a revelation made in a dream to one Matthew Chancellor. The people did not only expect to be cured of such distempers as were in their nature incurable, but even to recover their lost eyes, and their mutilated limbs. The following story, which scarce exceeds what I observed upon the spot, was told me by a gentleman of character. 'An old woman in the workhouse at Yeovil, who had long been a cripple, and made use of crutches, was strongly inclined to drink of the Glastonbury waters, which she was assured would cure her of her lameness. The master of the workhouse procured her several bottles of water, which had such an effect, that she soon laid aside one crutch, and not long after, the other. This was extolled, as a miraculous cure. But the man protested to his friends, that he had imposed upon her, and fetched the water from an ordinary spring.' I need not inform the Reader, that when the force of imagination had spent itself, she relapsed into her former infirmity."

Whether the French Kings possessed this Gift in a greater or less degree than our own, I cannot decide; but in point of antiquity, by the accounts of their Historians, they exceed us by many centuries.

The advocates for the priority of the Kings of England in this wonderful Gift, tell you, that the French, seeing it with a jealous eye, invented a tale, and carried their claim up to Clovis, the first of that name in France, and their first Christian King, who acceded to the Throne A. D. 481; whereas we do not pretend to go higher than Edward the Confessor, who died in 1066.

In reward for Clovis's faith and conversion, this Gift was bestowed upon him at his baptism, A. D. 496; and which he accordingly exercised immediately on one of his favourites[185].

How it was first discovered to be inherent in the French King we are not told; though we are assured as to our own, that the knowledge of such power in King Edward was discovered, like many other similar wonders, from a dream.

The usual date of the introduction of this miraculous Gift into France is fixed in the Reign of St. Louis [i. e. IX], a contemporary with our Henry III. about 160 years after the death of the Confessor[186].

Unfortunately for the French Kings, there is a story extant, which overthrows their healing power, in a palpable instance which happened to Louis XI. who having had an apoplexy, sent for a famous man to cure him, by name Francis of Poul. Francis, unhappily, had the Evil; but, alas! the Saint could not cure the King; and, what was worse, the King could not cure the Saint[187].

On the other hand, as the French Kings possessed the faculty sooner than our Kings, so did it last longer; for King George I. had the good sense not to pretend to it; whereas the French Kings kept up the farce at least till 1775, though with some address in the words spoken by the King; viz. "The King touches you, and may God heal you!" ["Le Roy te touche, Dieu te guerisse."] So that, in case the Touch fails, it is known where the blame is to lie; which is to be attributed to the anger of God, or the want of faith in the party[188]. The French Kings gave alms on the occasion; but I find no mention of particular pieces, as was the custom with us. I do not find that the French Kings ever touched, except upon Coronations; though it was a repeated, if not an annual ceremony with us, performed daily for a certain season[189], attended with a Form of Prayer, compiled for the purpose, which I shall hereafter preserve at length in the Appendix, together with the Ceremonial, after having given such accounts of the Practice itself, under the respective Kings, as are recorded by Writers on the subject.

To begin in order of time, I shall give you the narrative in Mr. Stowe's words, from the Latin account by Alfred, Abbot of Rivaulx. Thus then it is:

"A young woman, married, but without children, had a disease about her jawes, and under her cheeke, like unto kernels, which they termed akornes, and this disease so corrupted her face with stench, that shee coulde scarce without great shame speake to any man. This woman was admonished in her sleepe, to go to King Edwarde, and get him to washe her face with water, and shee shoulde bee whole. To the Court shee came; and the King hearing of this matter, disdained not to doe it; having a bason of water brought unto him, hee dipped his hand therein, and washed the womannes face, and touched the diseased place; and this hee did oftentimes, sometimes also signing it with the signe of the Crosse, which after hee hadde thus washed it, the hard crust or skinne was softened and dissolved; and drawing his hand by divers of the holes, out of the kernels came little wormes, whereof they were full with corrupt matter and blood, the King still pressed it with his handes to bring forth the corruption, and disdained not to suffer the stench of the disease, untill hee hadde brought forth all the corruption with pressing: this done, hee commanded her a sufficient allowance every day for all thinges necessary, untill she hadd received perfect health, which was within a weeke after; and whereas shee was ever beefore barren, within one yeere shee had a childe by her husband. And although this thing seeme strange, yet the Normans sayde that hee often did the like in his youth, when he was in Normandy[191]."

It does not appear that the King knew of this Gift before; but he continued to use it ever after, and his successors followed him in the practice.

But this is not all: for Stowe affords us but one instance of the cure of a blind man by King Edward; whereas the Abbot's account[192] extends to six men totally blind, besides another who had lost one of his eyes; all of whom were restored to perfect sight by the King[193].

Had business enough upon his hands to employ his time, without thinking of such a matter as this; but however, that he might, in quieter times, enjoy this Kingly attribute (though only a Bastard Son of a Territorial Duke), Voltaire tells us, that some dependants endeavoured to persuade the world, that this Gift was bestowed upon him from Heaven[194]. Whether he ever exercised it does not appear. Nothing but a special bounty of Heaven could convey to him this privilege; and such interference was necessary; for it was anciently held not to be inherent in any but lawful Kings, and not to extend to Usurpers; so that it must have slept during all the wars between the Houses of York and Lancaster, till resumed by Henry VII. as will be mentioned in its place.

Mr. Joshua Barnes, the most copious Historiographer of this Reign, does not positively say that King Edward exercised this Gift, presuming only that he had a double right to it, as Heir to both the Realms of England and of France; and, consequently, more eminently endowed than Philip of Valois, the then French King[195]. The French, no doubt, would deny it to him, as an usurping claimant of their Crown; though they could not refuse his right, as derived to him as a legal King of England.

I have already conceived the Gift of healing by the Touch to have been, as it were, in abeyance during the Civil Wars between the Houses of York and Lancaster; and therefore have found no historical record of Cures performed by this Saint-like King, who had such ample religious claims. I have called him Saint-like, because he never was canonized, though it was attempted and refused by the Pope in the Reign of Henry VII. for reasons to be seen in Fuller's Church History of Britain[196].

Two reasons against the canonization are suggested by different Writers:—1. That the then Pope thought King Henry VI. too simple to be sainted:—2. That the contingent expence amounted to more than King Henry VII. was willing to defray, being not less than 1500 ducats of gold, a large sum at that time of day[197].

But, however, although King Henry VI. performed no Cures in his life-time, yet was a man miraculously saved from death at the gallows by the appearance of the King, 40 years after his demise (in the 10th year of Henry VII.), by which intervention the halter had no effect; for the convict was found alive, after having hung the usual hour, and went speedily (as in duty bound) to return thanks at the King's Tomb at Chertsey, for such a wonderful deliverance. The Story states, that the man was really innocent, though, from circumstantial evidence, presumed to have been guilty; otherwise the Ghost of so pious and merciful a King had doubtless never appeared to him and interposed.

It is evident, from various concurrent circumstances, that this King touched for the Evil, as the Religious Ceremonial used upon those occasions, such as Prayers, Benedictions, Suffrages, &c. during his Reign, are to be found not only in MS. in the British Museum, but were afterwards printed by order of King James II. A. D. 1686; both in Latin. Another proof arises from charges made for pieces of money delivered for this purpose in that Reign; for, in the 18th year of Henry VII. we find a disbursement of 20 shillings, made by John Heron, "for heling 3 seke folks;" and again, "13s. 4d. for heling 2 seke folks." From these sums it is evident, that the Touch-pieces given were Nobles, or 6s. 8d. in value[198]. The accounts of this John Heron are preserved, together with those of divers others, in the office of the Remembrancer of the Exchequer. The fact is further established from the testimony of Polydore Vergil, who wrote his History at the command of King Henry VII. (though it was not made public till the following Reign); wherein the Writer, after going a little into the origin of this Gift, adds, that the Kings of England, even in his time, healed persons afflicted with this disease ["Nam Reges Angliæ etiam nunc Tactu strumosos sanant."] He further subjoins, that the exercise of it was attended with hymns, and other devout cæremonies; meaning, no doubt, those above-mentioned: ["quibusdam hymnis non sine ceremoniis prius recitatis[199]."] From looking over the Ceremonial, I conceive that by hymns, Polydore Vergil means the Gospel, which at that time was sung, or the suffrages, which might be chanted.

Fabian Philips, in his Treatise on Purveyance, p. 257, asserts, "that the Angels issued by the Kings of England on these occasions, amounted to a charge of three thousand pounds per annum."]

I shall give a transcript of the service appropriated to this occasion in the Appendix, (No. I.) as the printed copies are very scarce.

I cannot dismiss this Reign without observing that the learned Editor of the Northumberland Household Book[200] is hereby proved to have been very inattentive, when he says that "this miraculous Gift was left to be claimed by the Stuarts; our ancient Plantagenets were humbly content to cure the Cramp[201]."

What part the Plantagenets took in this business, for want of information, must be left doubtful; but ample proof has been offered, that the Tudors possessed the Gift of Healing.

The King now before us, though he kept a journal of all material occurrences, does not, however, once hint that he touched for the Evil, as probably his natural piety would have led him to have done, had it ever taken place; but, if there be any truth in the immediate prevalence of prayer on the ears of Heaven, an instance is recorded wherein the King obtained his request, in a more notable instance than any cure he might have performed by the operation of his Touch. Sir John Cheke, his Tutor for the Greek language, lay very dangerously ill, to the great disquiet and concern of the King, who, after frequent and daily inquiries, learned from the Physicians at last that there was not the least hope of life. "No," said the King, "he will not die now; for this morning I begged his life from God in my prayers, and obtained it." This accordingly came to pass; and Sir John recovered speedily, contrary to all medical expectations. The truth was ascertained by an ear-witness, the Earl of Huntingdon, who related it to the grandson of Sir John Cheke (Sir Thomas Cheke, of Pirgo, Essex), by whom it was mentioned to my Author[202].

"Nec Deus intersit nisi dignus vindice Nodus;"

and, if ever necessary, it was on this occasion; though the King lived but one year afterwards; and Cheke survived, to disgrace the Protestant Religion by his revolt.

That the Queen touched, is acknowledged; but it is as evident that she had no high opinion of the efficacy of such operation; for she once threw out an expression tending much to disparage the validity of it. Being on a Progress in Gloucestershire, her Majesty was so pestered with applications from diseased people, who pressed about her person in hopes of obtaining the Royal Touch, that she unguardedly, and in an ill-humour, exclaimed, "Alas, poor people, I cannot, I cannot cure you; it is God alone who can do it." This was interpreted by some, as a renunciation of the Gift; but, nevertheless, the Queen afterwards admitted a general resort to her for the purpose of being touched, and one in particular was healed[203]. On this, or some other occasion, a rigid Papist was under a necessity of applying for the Queen's Touch, after having tried every other means in vain; and was, says my Author, perfectly healed. This happening soon after the Pope had denounced the sentence of Excommunication against her Majesty, raised the reputation of this Gift in the Royal Line of England; seeing that the Pope had no power to divest the Queen of it[204].

The Queen, at another time, A. D. 1575, being on a Progress in Warwickshire, where she was entertained by the Earl of Leicester at Kenilworth Castle, during her abode there, "touched nine for the King's Evil[205]."

It does not appear that the Kings of Scotland ever pretended to this Gift; but when their James VI. came to the Throne of England, the virtue appeared in him; and he exercised it, as is evident from a passage in Macbeth[206], and still more strongly from Proclamations in this Reign, still extant[207].

Being lineally descended from Henry the Seventh's Daughter, Margaret, this King had the same title to the Gift as Henry himself, who, as has been seen, used it, though descended from a line of Usurpers.

So pious a King, and so jealous of every prerogatory right, divine and human, could not fail to exercise this preternatural endowment[208]; and accordingly we find him regulating the manner and time that persons shall be admitted to the Royal Touch, by divers Proclamations[209]. One is dated soon after his Accession, in 1621[210]; another in 1626; and a third in 1628[211]. He cured by his words only[212].

One would naturally be surprized to read of such numbers who received the Royal Touch in the 17th century, when the disease is now so nearly worn out; but Mr. Browne tells us it raged remarkably at the period when he lived.

As to the giving of a piece of Gold, Mr. Browne says, "it only shews his Majestie's Royal well-wishes towards the recovery of those who come thus to be healed." In other parts of his book, however, he tells us that "some, losing their Gold[213], their diseases have seized them afresh; when, upon obtaining a second Touch, and new Gold, their diseases have been seen to vanish." Again, as to the virtue contained in the Gold, he relates a story of a father and a son, who both were afflicted with the Evil, for which the former was touched, and received a piece of Gold; but the latter never was touched, and had no Gold; upon which the son borrows the father's Gold, and received great relief from it. During this interval the father grew worse, received back his Gold, and, after wearing it a little time, became better; and this practice was pursued for several years. Mr. Browne likewise gives other examples of the operation of the Gold, on, persons who had never received the Touch.—Though we have called it Gold, which, in itself, was anciently reckoned to have a sanative quality in itself, yet Silver would do as well; for Mr. Browne does not deny but that a Silver two-pence has effectually done the business. The case was, that the King (Charles I.), who was the Operator, was then a Prisoner at Hampton Court, and perhaps had no Gold to spare; and therefore, in several instances, he used Silver, with which many were known to have been cured:—but, after all, by way of salvo, Mr. Browne adds, that such as failed of their cure—wanted Faith. From another passage in Mr. Browne's preface, one would be tempted to think that the virtue neither consisted in the Gold or the Silver, but in the Ribbon to which it was pendent; for he assures those who contended that a second piece of Gold was necessary on a second Touch, that the same Gold, newly strung upon a White Ribbon, would work as effectually as a fresh piece of Gold. Some, he tells us, have been cured with the Touch only, without Gold or Silver.

Among other salvos in case of failure of the Touch, added to the want of faith, is, that the disease was mistaken in many instances; and that the Patients did not labour under the Struma, or Evil, but some other similar disorder, over which the Royal Hand had no divine influence.

There was such sympathy between the Royal Hand and the part touched, that Mr. Browne seems to believe a case that had been sent to him, of a woman, at a distance from London, who had formerly been cured by King Charles I. and whose sores broke out afresh upon the day of the King's death, though she was so ignorant of the world as not to know that it was to take place. But she soon recovered her health.

The effect of this Divine Emanation has been said even to extend beyond the life of this unfortunate Monarch; for part of the blood of this King being preserved on a piece of linen dipped therein, was found to have the same effect as the Touch, or his Prayers, when he was living[214].

A wen is said to be cured by the hand of a dead man while hanging on the gallows. This is still a superstitious notion among the common people at this day; and a child's cawl is a preservative against drowning in the notions of sailors (who are extremely credulous in general): one often sees them advertised for sale; and, if bought at all, they find a vent, no doubt, at Wapping.

A wedding ring of gold, rubbed on a stye upon the eyelid, used to be esteemed a sovereign remedy; but, if I mistake not, it must be applied nine times.

In January 1683, the following Proclamation was ordered to be published in every Parish in the Kingdom[215].

"At the Court at Whitehall, 9th of January 1683. Present, the King's Most Excellent Majesty; Lord Keeper, Lord Privy Seal, Duke of Ormond, Duke of Beaufort, Earl of Oxford, Earl of Huntingdon, Earl of Bridgewater, Earl of Peterborow, Earl of Chesterfield, Earl of Clarendon, Earl of Bathe, Earl of Craven, Earl of Nottingham, Earl of Rochester, Lord Bishop of London, Mr. Secretary Jenkins, Mr. Chancellor of the Duchy, Lord Chief Justice Jeffryes, Mr. Godolphin. Whereas, by the grace and blessing of God, the Kings and Queens of this Realm, by many ages past, have had the happiness, by their sacred Touch, and invocation of the name of God, to cure those who are afflicted with the disease called the King's Evil; and his Majesty, in no less measure than any of his Royal Predecessors, having had good success therein; and, in his most gracious and pious disposition, being as ready and willing as any King or Queen of this Realm ever was, in any thing to relieve the distresses and necessities of his good subjects; yet, in his princely wisdom, foreseeing that in this (as in all other things) order is to be observed, and fit times are necessary to be appointed for the performing of this great work of charity, his Majesty was therefore this day pleased to declare in Council his Royal will and pleasure to be, That (in regard heretofore the usual times of presenting such persons for this purpose have been prefixed by his Royal Predecessors) the times of public healings shall from henceforth be from the Feast of All-Saints, commonly called Alhallow-tide, till a week before Christmas; and after Christmas, until the first day of March, and then to cease till the Passion-week, being times most convenient, both for the temperature of the season, and in respect of contagion, which may happen in this near access to his Majesty's sacred Person. And when his Majesty shall at any time think fit to go any progress, he will be pleased to appoint such other times for healing as shall be most convenient. And his Majesty doth hereby accordingly order and command, that, from the time of publishing this his Majesty's order, none presume to repair to his Majesty's Court to be healed of the said disease, but only at or within the times for that purpose hereby appointed as aforesaid. And his Majesty was farther pleased to order, that all such as shall hereafter come or repair to the Court for this purpose, shall bring with them certificates, under the hands and seals of the parson, vicar, or minister, and of both or one of the churchwardens of the respective parishes where they dwell, and from whence they come, testifying, according to the truth, that they have not, at any time before, been touched by his Majesty, to the intent to be healed of their disease. And all ministers and churchwardens are hereby required to be very careful to examine into the truth before they give such certificates; and also to keep a register of all certificates they shall from time to time give. And, to the end that all his Majesty's loving subjects may the better take knowledge of this his Majesty's command, his Majesty was pleased to direct, that this Order be read publicly in all parish-churches, and then be affixed to some conspicuous place there; and for that end the same be printed, and a convenient number of copies sent to the Most Reverend Father in God the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Lord Archbishop of York, who are to take care that the same be delivered to all parishes within their respective provinces.

Loyd.

"London, printed by the Assigns of John Bill, deceased, and by Henry Hills, Printers to the King's Most Excellent Majesty."

A regular Notice to the same effect was published by authority in the London Gazette.

In 1684, John Browne, Sworn Chirurgeon in Ordinary to the King's Most Excellent Majesty, published a work, not now easily to be met with, except in the Libraries of the curious; and perhaps, for its general subjects, exploded at this day, as the fashion of physick has much altered, as well as many new and important discoveries been made, since it was written. It is in three Books. The Titles to the three Books are—1. "Adenochoiradelogia; or, an Anatomick-Chyrurgical Treatise of Glandules and Strumaes, or King's Evil Swellings. Together with the Royal Gift of Healing or Cure thereof, by contact or imposition of Hands, performed for above 640 years by our Kings of England, continued with their admirable Effects and miraculous Events; and concluded with many wonderful Examples of Cures by their Sacred Touch; all which are succinctly described by John Browne, one of His Majesty's Chyrurgeons in Ordinary, and Chyrurgeon of his Majesty's Hospital; published with His Majesty's Royal Approbation: Together with the Testimony of many eminent Doctors and Chyrurgeons. Sold by Samuel Lowndes, over-against Exeter Change in the Strand." 2. "Chæradelogia; or an Exact Discourse of Strumaes, or King's Evil Swellings; wherein are discovered their Names and Natures, Differences, Causes, Signs, Presages, and Cure, in that modest and plain Dress, that the meanest capacity may hereby find out the Disease." 3. Charisma Basilicon; or, the Royal Gift of Healing Strumaes, or King's Evil, Swellings, by Contact or Imposition of the Sacred Hands of our Kings of England and of France, given them at their Inaugurations. Shewing the Gift itself, and its continued Use, declaring all Persons Healed thereby, without any respect either to their Age, Sex, Temper, or Constitution; with the Manner, Form, and Ceremonies thereof; and divers general Rules for the meanest capacity to find out the Disease. The best expedient to prevent poor People from unnecessary Journeys. The whole concluded with above Sixty admirable Cures, performed with and without Gold, by His Majesty's Benediction; by His Late Majesty's precious Blood; and the like." Prefixed to the work is a portrait of Browne, engraved by R. White, inscribed "Johannes Browne, Regis Britannici necnon Nosocomii sui Chirurgus Ordinarius;" and a curious frontispiece, also engraved by White, entitled "The Royal Gift of Healing," representing Charles II. seated on his Throne, surrounded by his Court, touching for the King's Evil.

This ceremony seems to have been in high vogue during this reign. "The King gives freely," says Mr. Browne, "not calling the Angels to witness, nor sinking so low as others do, to perform the same by Black Art or Inchantment. He does it with a pure heart, in the presence of the Almighty, who knows all things, without superstition, curing all that approach his Royal Touch. And this I may frankly presume to aver, that never any of his Predecessors have ever exercised it more, or more willingly or freely, whose wonderful effects, and certainty of cure, we must and shall ever acknowledge[216]."

This is followed by accounts of about 70 "wonderful and miraculous cures, performed by his Majesty's Sacred Hands;" and also by "An Account of the Number of Persons touched for the King's Evil, from May 1660 to September 1664, from the Registers kept by Thomas Haynes, Esq. Serjeant of the Chapel Royal; from which I shall copy the totals of each year:

Another account, kept by Mr. Thomas Donkley, Keeper of his Majesty's Closet belonging to the Chapel Royal, continues the Numbers as follows:

It appears by the Newspapers of the time, that on the 30th of March, 1714, two hundred persons were touched by Queen Anne[217]. Amongst these was Samuel Johnson, afterwards the justly celebrated Moral Writer. He was sent by the advice of Sir John Floyer, then a Physician at Lichfield; and many years afterwards, being asked if he could remember Queen Anne, said, "he had a confused, but somehow a sort of solemn recollection of a Lady in diamonds, and a long black hood."

The Honourable Daines Barrington[218] has preserved an anecdote, which he heard from an old man who was witness in a cause with respect to this supposed miraculous power of Healing. "He had, by his evidence, fixed the time of a fact, by Queen Anne's having been at Oxford, and touched him, whilst a child, for the Evil. When he had finished his evidence, I had an opportunity of asking him, whether he was really cured? Upon which he answered, with a significant smile, "that he believed himself to have never had any complaint that deserved to be considered as the Evil; but that his parents were poor, and had no objection to the bit of gold."

The learned and honourable Writer very properly observes on this occasion, "that this piece of gold, which was given to those who were touched, accounts for the great resort upon this occasion, and the supposed afterwards miraculous cures."

Although this Monarch, who succeeded to the Crown in 1714, had the good sense not to pretend to this miraculous Gift, it was assumed by the Descendants of the race of Stuarts. And it is well recollected, that Mr. Carte's (in other respects very excellent) "History of England" fell into almost immediate disrepute, on his making, in one of his notes, a bold assertion, the substance of which shall be here given:

"Whatever is to be said in favour of its being appropriated to the eldest Descendant of the first branch of the Royal Line of the Kings of France, England, &c. I have myself seen a very remarkable instance of such a cure, which could not possibly be ascribed to the Royal Unction. One Christopher Lovel, born at Wells in Somersetshire, but when he grew up residing in the City of Bristol, where he got his living by labour, was extremely afflicted for many years with that distemper, and such a flow of the scrophulous humour, that, though it found a vent by five running sores about his breast, neck, and arms, there was such a tumour on one side of his neck, as left no hollow between his cheek and the upper part of his left shoulder, and forced him to keep his head always awry. The young man was reduced, by the virulence of the humour, to the lowest state of weakness; appeared a miserable object in the eyes of all the inhabitants of that populous city; and, having for many years tried all the remedies which the art of physic could administer, without receiving any benefit, resolved at last to go abroad to be touched. He had an uncle in the place, who was an old seaman, and carried him from Bristol, at the end of August, A. D. 1716, along with him to Cork in Ireland, where he put him on board a ship that was bound to St. Martin's in the Isle of Ree. From thence Christopher made his way first to Paris, and thence to the place where he was touched, in the beginning of November following, by the eldest lineal Descendant of a race of Kings, who had, indeed, for a long succession of ages, cured that distemper by the Royal Touch. But this descendant and next heir of their blood had not, at least at that time, been crowned or anointed. The usual effect, however, followed: from the moment that the man was touched and invested with the narrow riband, to which a small piece of silver was pendant, according to the rites prescribed in the office appointed by the Church for that solemnity, the humour dispersed insensibly, his sores healed up, and he recovered strength daily, till he arrived in perfect health, in the beginning of January following, at Bristol, having spent only four months and some few days in his voyage. There it was, and in the week preceding St. Paul's fair, that I saw the man, in his recovered vigour of body, without any remains of his complaint, but what were to be seen in the red scars then left upon the five places where the sharp humour had found a vent, but which were otherwise entirely healed, and as sound as any other part of his body. Dr. Lane, an eminent physician in the place, whom I visited on my arrival, told me of this cure, as the most wonderful thing that ever happened; and pressed me as well to see the man upon whom it was performed, as to talk about his case with Mr. Samuel Pye, a very skilful surgeon, and I believe still living in that city, who had tried in vain, for three years together, to cure the man by physical remedies. I had an opportunity of doing both; and Mr. Pye, after dining together, carrying me to the man, I examined and informed myself fully of all particulars, relating as well to his illness as his cure; and found upon the whole, that if it is not to be deemed miraculous, it at least deserved the character given it by Dr. Lane, of being one of the most wonderful events that has ever happened."

APPENDIX, No. I.

The Ceremonies for the Healing of them that be diseased with the King's Evil, as they were practised in the time of King Henry VII[219].

Rubrick.—First, the King, kneeling, shall begin, and say,

In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritûs Sancti. Amen.

Rubrick.—And so soon as He hath said that, He shall say, Benedicite.

Rubrick.—The Chaplain, kneeling before the King, having a stole about his neck, shall answer, and say,

Dominus sit in corde tuo et labiis tuis, ad confitendum omnia peccata tua, in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritûs Sancti. Amen.

Rubrick.—Or else to say,

Jesus nos exaudiat, in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritûs Sancti.

Rubrick.—Then by and by the King shall say, Confiteor Deo, Beatæ Mariæ Virgini, Omnibus Sanctis, et Vobis, quia peccavi nimis in cogitatione, locutione, et opere, mea culpa [sic.] Precor Sanctam Mariam, omnes Sanctos Dei, et Vos, orare pro me.

Rubrick.—The Chaplain shall answer, and say,

Misereatur Vestri Omnipotens Deus, et demittat Vobis omnia peccata Vestra, liberet Vos ab omni malo, salvet et confirmet in bono, et ad vitam perducat æternam. Amen.

Absolutionem et Remissionem omnium peccatorum Vestrorum, spatium veræ pœnitentiæ, et emendationem vitæ, gratiam et consolationem Sancti Spiritûs, tribuat Vobis omnipotens et misericors Dominus. Amen.

Rubrick.—This done, the Chaplain shall say, Dominus Vobiscum.

Rubrick.—The King shall answer,

Et cum Spiritu tuo.

Rubrick.—The Chaplain.

Sequentia Sancti Evangelii secundùm Marcum.

Rubrick.—The King shall answer.

Gloria tibi, Domine.

Rubrick.—The Chaplain shall read the Gospel.

In illo tempore, recumbentibus undecim Discipulis apparuit illis Jesus; et exprobavit incredulitatem eorum, et duritiem cordis, qui iis qui viderant eum resurrexisse, non crediderunt. Et dixit eis, Euntes in mundum universum, prædicate Evangelium omni creaturæ. Qui crediderit et baptizatus fuerit, salvus erit; qui verò non crediderit, condemnabitur. Signa autem eos, qui crediderint, hæc sequentur: In nomine meo dæmonia ejicient, linguis loquentur novis, serpentes tollent; et si mortiferum quid biberint non eis nocebit; super ægros manus imponent, et bene [seipsos] habebunt.

Rubrick.—Which clause [super ægros, &c.] the Chaplain repeats as long as the King is handling the Sick Person. And in the time of the repeating the aforesaid words [super ægros, &c.] the Clerk of the Closet shall kneel before the King, having the Sick Person upon the right hand, and the Sick Person shall likewise kneel before the King; and then the King shall lay his hand upon the Sore of the Sick Person. This done, the Chaplain shall make an end of the Gospel; and in the mean time the Chirurgeon shall lead away the Sick Person from the King.

—Et Dominus quidem Jesus, postquam locutus est eis, assumptus est in cœlum, et sedet à dextris Dei. Illi autem profecti, prædicaverunt ubique, Domino cooperante, et sermonem confirmante, sequentibus signis.

Rubrick.—Then the Chaplain shall begin to say again, Dominus Vobiscum.

Rubrick.—The King shall answer,

Et cum spiritu tuo.

Rubrick.—The Chaplain. Initium Sancti Evangelii secundum Joannem.

Rubrick.—The King shall say.

Gloria tibi, Domine.

Rubrick.—The Chaplain then shall say this Gospel following.

In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Hoc erat in principio apud Deum. Omnia per ipsum facta sunt; et sine ipso factum est nihil, quod factum est: in ipso vita erat, et vita erat Lux hominum; et Lux in tenebris lucet, et Tenebræ eam non comprehenderunt. Fuit homo missus a Deo, cui nomen erat Joannes. Hic venit in testimonium, ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine, ut omnes crederent per illum. Non erat ille Lux, sed ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine. Erat Lux vera quæ illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum.

Rubrick.—Which last clause [Erat Lux vera, &c.] shall still be repeated so long as the King shall be crossing the Sore of the Sick Person with an Angel Noble. And the Sick Person to have the same Angel hanged about his neck, and to wear it until he be full whole.

This done, the Chirurgeon shall lead away the Sick Person, as he did before; and then the Chaplain shall make an end of the Gospel.

—In mundo erat, et mundus per ipsum factus est, et mundus eum non cognovit. In propria venit, et sui eum non receperunt. Quot quot autem receperunt eum dedit eis potestatem filios Dei fieri, his, qui credunt in nomine ejus, qui non ex sanguinibus, neque ex voluntate carnis, neque ex voluntate viri, sed ex Deo nati sunt. Et Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis; et vidimus gloriam ejus, gloriam quasi unigeniti a Patre, plenum gratiæ et veritatis.

Rubrick.—Then the Chaplain shall say,

Sit nomen Domini benedictum.

Rubrick.—The King shall answer,

Ex hoc nunc et usque in seculum.

Rubrick.—Then shall the Chaplain say this Collect following, praying for the Sick Person or Persons.

Domine exaudi orationem meam [nostram].

Rubrick.—The King shall answer,

Et clamor meus [noster] ad te veniat.
Oremus.

Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, salus æterna credentium, exaudi nos pro famulis tuis, pro quibus misericordiæ tuæ imploramus auxilium, ut, redditâ sibi sanitate, tibi in Ecclesiâ tuâ referant actiones. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.

Rubrick.—This Prayer is to be said secretly, after the Sick Persons are departed from the King, at his pleasure.

Dominator Domine Deus Omnipotens, cujus benignitate cæci vident, surdi audiunt, muti loquuntur, claudi ambulant, leprosi mundantur, omnes infirmorum curantur languores, et à quo solo donum Sanationis humano generi etiam tribuitur, et tanta gratia pro incredibili tuâ ergà hoc regnum bonitate, Regibus ejusdem concessa est, ut solâ manuum illorum impositione, morbus gravissimus fœtidissimusque depellatur: concede propitius ut tibi propterea gratias agamus, et pro isto singulari beneficio in nos collato, non nobis ipsis, sed nomini tuo assiduè gloriam demus, nosque sic ad pietatem semper exerceamus, ut tuam nobis donatam gratiam non solùm diligenter conservare, sed indies magis magisque adaugere laboremus; et præsta ut quorumcunque corporibus in nomine tuo manus imposuerimus, hâc tuâ virtute in illis operante et nobis ministrantibus, ad pristinam sanitatem restituantur, eam conservent, et pro eâdem tibi, ut summo Medico et omnium morborum depulsori, perpetuò nobiscum gratias agant; sicque deinceps vitam instituant, ut non corpus solùm ab infirmitate, sed anima etiam à peccato omnino sanata videatur. Per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum Filium tuum, qui tecum vivit et regnat in unitate Sancti Spiritûs, per omnia secula seculorum. Amen.[220]

APPENDIX, No. II.

From a Folio Prayer Book, printed 1710.

At the Healing.

Prevent us, O Lord, &c.

Gospel.

From the 16th Chapter of St. Mark, beginning at the 14th Verse: "Afterwards he appeared, &c." to the end of the Chapter: "and confirming the Word with Signs following."

Let us pray.

Lord have mercy upon us.
Christ, &c.
Lord, &c.
Our Father, &c.

Rubrick.—[Then shall the Infirm Persons, one by one, be presented to the Queen upon their Knees; and, as every one is presented, and while the Queen is laying her Hands upon them, and putting the Gold about their necks, the Chaplain that officiates, turning himself to her Majesty, shall say these words following:]

God give a Blessing to this Work; and grant that these Sick Persons, on whom the Queen lays her Hands, may recover, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Rubrick.—[After all have been presented, the Chaplain shall say,]

Verse.—O Lord, save thy Servants;

Resp.—Who put their Trust in Thee.

Verse.—Send them Help from thy Holy Place.

Resp.—And evermore mightily defend them.

Verse.—Help us, O God of our Salvation.

Resp.—And, for the Glory of thy Name deliver us, and be merciful to us Sinners for thy Name's Sake.

Verse.—O Lord, hear our Prayers.

Resp.—And let our Cry come unto Thee.

Rubrick.—[These answers are to be made by them that come to be healed.]

Let us pray.

O Almighty God, who art the Giver of all Health, and the Aid of them that seek to thee for Succour, we call upon thee for thy Health and Goodness mercifully to be shewed upon these thy Servants, that they, being healed of their Infirmities, may give Thanks unto thee in thy Holy Church, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Rubrick.—[Then the Chaplain, standing with his face towards them that come to be healed, shall say,]

The Almighty Lord, who is a most strong Tower to all them that put their Trust in him; to whom all things in Heaven, in Earth, and under the Earth, do bow and obey, be now and evermore your Defence; and make you know and feel, that there is none other Name under Heaven given to Man, in whom, and through whom, you may receive Health and Salvation, but only the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

The Grace of our Lord, &c. Amen.

APPENDIX, No. III.

The Ceremonies of Blessing Cramp-Rings on Good-Friday, used by the Catholick Kings of England.

The Psalme "Deus misereatur nostri," &c. with the "Gloria Patri."

May God take pity upon us, and blesse us;* may he send forth the light of his face upon us, and take pity on us.

That we may know thy ways on earth* among all nations thy salvation.

May people acknowledge thee, O God:* may all people acknowledge thee.

Let nations reioice, and be glad, because thou iudgest people with equity,* and doest guide nations on the earth.

May people acknowledge thee, O God, may all people acknowledge thee,* the earth has sent forth her fruit.

May God blesse us, that God who is ours: may that God blesse us,* and may all the bounds of the earth feare him.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son,* and to the Holy Ghost.

As it was in the beginning, and now, and ever,* and for ever, and ever. Amen.

Then the King reades this Prayer:

Almighty eternal God, who by the most copious gifts of thy grace, flowing from the unexhausted fountain of thy bounty, hast been graciously pleased, for the comfort of mankind, continually to grant us many and various meanes to relieve us in our miseries; and art willing to make those the instruments and channels of thy gifts, and to grace those persons with more excellent favours, whom thou hast raised to the Royal dignity; to the end that, as by Thee they Reign, and govern others, so by Thee they may prove beneficial to them, and bestow thy favours on the people: Graciously heare our prayers, and favourably receive those vows we powre forth with humility, that Thou mayst grant to us, who beg with the same confidence the favour which our Ancestours, by their hopes in thy mercy have obtained: through Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Rings lying in one bason or more, this prayer is to be said over them:

O God, the Maker of heavenly and earthly creatures, and the most gracious Restorer of mankind, the Dispenser of spiritual grace, and the Origin of all blessings; send downe from heaven thy Holy Spirit the Comforter upon these Rings, artificially fram'd by the workman; and by thy greate power purify them so, that all the malice of the fowle and venomous Serpent be driven out; and so the metal, which by Thee was created, may remaine pure, and free from all dregs of the enemy: through Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Blessing of the Rings.

O God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob, heare mercifully our prayers. Spare those who feare Thee. Be propitious to thy suppliants; and graciously be pleased to send downe from Heaven thy holy Angel, that he may sanctify ✠ and blesse ✠ these Rings; to the end they may prove a healthy remedy to such as implore thy name with humility, and accuse themselves of the sins which ly upon their conscience: who deplore their crimes in the sight of thy divine clemency, and beseech, with earnestness and humility, thy most serene piety. May they in fine, by the invocation of thy holy name, become profitable to all such as weare them, for the health of their soule and body, through Christ our Lord. Amen.

A Blessing.

O God, who hast manifested the greatest wonders of thy power by the cure of diseases, and who were pleased that Rings should be a pledge of fidelity in the Patriark Judah, a priestly ornament in Aaron, the mark of a faithful guardian in Darius, and in this Kingdom a remedy for divers diseases; graciously be pleased to blesse ✠ and sanctify ✠ these Rings; to the end that all such who weare them may be free from all snares of the Devil, may be defended by the power of celestial armour; and that no contraction of the nerves, or any danger of the falling-sickness, may infest them; but that in all sort of diseases by thy help they may find relief. In the name of the Father, ✠ and of the Son, ✠ and of the Holy Ghost. ✠ Amen.

Blesse, O my soule, the Lord,* and let all things which are within me praise his holy name.

Blesse, O my soule, the Lord,* and do not forget all his favours.

He forgives all thy iniquities,* he heales all thy infirmities.

He redeemes thy life from ruin,* he crownes thee with mercy and commiseration.

He fils thy desires with what is good:* thy youth, like that of the eagle, shall be renewed.

The Lord is he who does mercy,* and does, iustice to those who suffer wrong.

The merciful and pitying Lord:* the long sufferer, and most mighty merciful.

He wil not continue his anger for ever;* neither wil he threaten for ever.

He has not dealt with us in proportion to our sins;* nor has he rendered unto us according to our offences.

Because according to the distance of heaven from earth,* so has he enforced his mercies, upon those who feare him.

As far distant as the east is from the west,* so far has he divided our offences from us.

After the manner that a Father takes pity of his sons; so has the Lord taken pity of those who feare him;* because he knows what we are made of.

He remembers that we are but dust. Man, like hay, such are his days;* like the flower in the field, so wil he fade away.

Because his breath wil passe away through him, and he wil not be able to subsist,* and it wil find no longer its owne place.

But the mercy of the Lord is from all eternity;* and wil be for ever upon those who feare him.

And his iustice comes upon the children of their children,* to those who keep his wil.

And are mindful of his commandments,* to performe them.

The Lord in heaven has prepared himself a throne, and his kingdom shall reign over all.

Blesse yee the Lord, all yee Angels of his; yee who are powerful in strength:* who execute his commands, at the hearing of his voice when he speakes.

Blesse yee the Lord, all yee vertues of his:* yee Ministers who execute his wil.

Blesse yee the Lord, all yee works of his throughout all places of his dominions:* my Soule praise thou the Lord.

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son,* and to the Holy Ghost.

As it was in the beginning, and now and ever,* and for ever and ever. Amen.

Wee humbly implore, O merciful God, thy infinit clemency; that as we come to Thee with a confident soule, and sincere faith, and a pious assurance of mind: with the like devotion thy beleevers may follow on these tokens of thy grace. May all superstition be banished hence; far be all suspicion of any diabolical fraud; and to the glory of thy name let all things succeede: to the end thy beleevers may understand Thee to be the dispenser of all good; and may be sensible, and publish, that whatsoever is profitable to soule or body, is derived from Thee: through Christ our Lord. Amen.

These Prayers being said, the King's Highnes rubbeth the Rings between his hands, saying,

Sanctify, O Lord, these Rings, and graciously bedew them with the dew of thy benediction, and consecrate them by the rubbing of our hands, which thou hast been pleased according to our ministery to sanctify by an external effusion of holy oyle upon them: to the end that what the nature of the mettal is not able to performe, may be wrought by the greatnes of thy grace: through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Then must holy water be cast on the Rings, saying,

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

O Lord, the only begotten Son of God, Mediatour of God and men, Jesus Christ, in whose name alone salvation is sought for; and to such as hope in thee givest an easy acces to thy Father: who, when conversing among men, thyself a man, didst promise, by an assured oracle flowing from thy sacred mouth, that thy Father should grant whatever was asked him in thy name: Lend a gracious eare of pity to these prayers of ours; to the end that, approaching with confidence to the throne of thy grace, the beleevers may find, by the benefits conferr'd upon them, that by thy mediation we have obtained what we have most humbly begd in thy name: who livest and reignest with God the Father, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, one God for ever and ever. Amen.

Wee beseech thee, O Lord, that the Spirit, which proceedes from thee, may prevent and follow on our desires; to the end that what we beg with confidence for the good of the faithful, we may efficaciously obtaine by thy gracious gift: through Christ our Lord. Amen.

O most clement God; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; wee supplicate and beseech thee, that what is here performed by pious ceremonies to the sanctifying of thy name, may be prevalent to the defense of our soule and body on earth; and profitable to a more ample felicity in heaven: who livest and reignest God, world without end. Amen.

ORIGIN OF THE TITLES
OF SOME OF THE
ENGLISH NOBILITY.

————

"It is an ancient received saying, that there is no Poverty but is descended of Nobility; nor no Nobility but is descended of Beggary."

History of the Gwedir Family, p. 94.

————

Westmoreland, Earl.—From the County.

Burghersh[221], Baron (Fane).—Bartholomew, Baron of Burghersh, was the Tenth Knight of the Order of the Garter, at the Institution 1350; who left a Daughter and Heir, who married Edward Le Despenser; which official Title was afterwards erected into a Barony by Summons, A. D. 1285; and was for a long time merged in the Family of Fane, Earl of Westmoreland, till the failure of Male Issue in a direct line, 1762. The Earldom and Barony of Burghersh passed to a distant branch, of the name of Fane; but the Barony of Le Despenser went by a Female to Sir Francis Dashwood, Bart. in right of his Mother.

Le Despenser, Baron (Stapleton).—A nominal Title from official derivation. It was held originally by Descent and Summons, A.D. 1295. Anno 23 Edward I. it passed by Marriage to the Earl of Westmoreland; and, being a Fee, descended to Sir Francis Dashwood, Bart.; and after him to his Sister, Lady Austen, and now, 1788, is vested in Sir Thomas Stapleton, Bart. of Oxfordshire.

Wentworth[222], Viscount (Noel).—After the Barony of Wentworth had continued for several successions in the name of Wentworth, of Nettlestead in Suffolk, the Title devolved on Anne, the Wife of John Lord Lovelace, whose Daughter Martha inherited the Barony of Wentworth, and to whom the Title was confirmed, by Descent, in Parliament, A.D. 1702; and she walked at the Coronation of Queen Anne as Baroness Wentworth in her own right. She dying without Issue, 1745, the Title devolved on the Descendants of Sir William Noel, Bart. who had married Margaret, another Daughter of Lord Lovelace, by Anne, the Heiress of Wentworth Lord Wentworth. Hence the Title passed to Edward, the eldest Son of Sir Clobery Noel, Bart. who succeeded to his Father's Title of Baronet, 1733; and to the Barony of Wentworth, as Heir of Margaret, 1745. He was created Viscount Wentworth of Wellesborough, co. Leic. 1762.

Howland, Baron (Russell).—A Barony in the Duke of Bedford, granted in honour of Elizabeth, Daughter of John Howland, Esq. of Streatham in Surrey (by whom the Family acquired that estate), who married Wriothesley, Grandson of the first Duke of Bedford, and the eldest Son of Lord William Russell, who was beheaded 1683[223].

Normanby, Marquis, extinct (Sheffield).—The second Title of Sheffield Duke of Buckingham, taken from an obscure place in Lincolnshire.

Chandos, Duke (Brydges).—The Patent is dated April 29, 1719, wherein the Grantee is styled "Duke of Chandos in the County of Hereford." The Dukedom became extinct, by the death of James the third Duke, s. p. 1789. The Barony exists (1790), if a claim to it can be established, as that creation bears date A. D. 1554.

Arundel OF Wardour, Baron (Arundel[224]).—From Wardour Castle in Wiltshire. He is a Count of the Empire by Grant of Rodolph II. A. D. 1595[225].

Sondes, Baron (Watson).—A revived Title, from the inheritance of part of the estates of Lewis Watson, Earl of Rockingham and Viscount Sondes. Lewis Watson, having married the Heiress of Sir George Sondes, K.B. was created Earl of Rockingham and Viscount Sondes, in honour of his Wife's Father, 1714; so that the present Title is nominal. The Estate at Lees-Court in Kent came by the above marriage.

Onslow and Cranley, Baron (Onslow).—This Barony is both nominal and local, for the Family came from Onslow in Shropshire. Their first settlement in Surrey was at Knowle, in the Parish of Cranley, whence came the second Barony by creation to George Onslow, the Son of Arthur (the Speaker), in the life-time of his Cousin Richard, then Lord Onslow, 1776. The original Patent, 1716, to Richard (who was Speaker also) the eldest Son of Sir Arthur Onslow, Bart. was limited to the Heirs Male of his Father, which carried the Title of Baron Onslow of Onslow and Clendon[226], to the Son of Arthur (the Speaker), on the death of his Cousin Richard Lord Onslow, 1776[227].

N.B. George Lord Onslow and Cranley was created into the latter Title, May 14, 1776; and succeeded his Cousin Richard in the Title of Onslow, on the 8th of the following October.

Berkeley, Earl.—From Berkeley Castle, the present Seat of the Family, in Gloucestershire. The Barony of Berkeley is a Feudal Honour by the Tenure of the Castle of Berkeley; and the Possessor of it had Summons to Parliament as a Baron by that Tenure, anno 23 Edward I.[228]

Dursley, Viscount.—From Dursley in Gloucestershire, the original Seat of the Family.

De Clifford, Baron (Southwell).—From Clifford Castle in Herefordshire; where Walter Fitz-Ponce, whose Father possessed it by marriage, resided, and took the name of Clifford. The first Fitz-Ponce came hither with the Conqueror, to whom he was related. The Barony passed in the Female Line to the Family of Southwell, to which it was confirmed A.D. 1775. The first Summons to Parliament was anno 23 Edward I. 1295.

Ducie, Baron, of Morton and Tortworth (Reynolds).—The Peer of the name of Ducie was descended from Sir Robert Ducie, Lord Mayor of London, 1631; and who had been created a Baronet[229]. The Issue Male of the name of Ducie failing, the Title was renewed by Patent, 1763, to Matthew Ducie, Lord Ducie of Morton in Staffordshire; with a Limitation to Thomas and Francis Reynolds, his Nephews, and their Heirs Male successively, by the Style of Lord Ducie of Tortworth in Gloucestershire. Thomas Reynolds succeeded to this Title on the death of his Uncle, 1770; and dying without Issue 1785, it devolved on his Brother Francis; who dying in 1808, was succeeded by his Son Thomas, present Lord Ducie.

Powis, Earl (Herbert).—Powis is a part of Shropshire bordering on Wales; and was formerly a little Kingdom, still known by the name of Powis-Land. The first Baron was created by Henry I. on a surrender of the actual Territory, and an acknowledgment of service[230].

Ludlow, Viscount.—From the Town of that name in Shropshire[231].

Audley, Baron (Thicknesse-Touchet). Audley is in Staffordshire. John Touchet married Joan, eldest Daughter of Lord Audley of Heleigh, whose Descendant was found Heir, and had Summons to Parliament, A.D. 1296[232]. The honour of Peerage in the name of Touchet, who was also Earl of Castlehaven in Ireland, ended in a Daughter (Lady Elizabeth), who married Philip Thicknesse, Esq. and died in 1762, leaving Issue; the Barony (being a Fee) passed to George Thicknesse, her Son, on the death of the Earl of Castlehaven, 1777; and who has taken, by sign-manual, 1784, the additional name of Touchet. The Earldom is extinct.

Abergavenny, Earl (Nevile).—This is a Title derived from a Lord Marcher, and taken, among many others now merged or extinct, from the place conquered. Mr. Pennant says, it is the only surviving Title of that nature[233].

Nevile, Viscount.—From the Name.

Middleton, Baron (Willoughby).—From an obscure Village, near Sutton-Coldfield, in Warwickshire[234].

Coventry, Earl.—From the City, or the Name.

Deerhurst, Viscount (Coventry).—From a place in Gloucestershire.

Stanhope, Earl.—A nominal Title. The first Peer of this Branch was created Viscount Stanhope of Mahon, and Baron Stanhope of Elvaston, in the County of Derby, 1717, from his having taken Port-Mahon, in the Island of Minorca, 1708.

Mahon, Viscount (Stanhope).—The same Peer was created Earl Stanhope 1718, by which his second Title became "Viscount Mahon."

Dudley and Ward, Viscount (Ward).—The Barony of Ward is nominal, and was conferred in 1644. The Viscounty (by creation in 1763) is derived from a Village near Birmingham in Warwickshire.

N. B. The Viscounty includes both Honours; the Title being Viscount Dudley and Ward.

Dorchester, Earl (Damer).—Lord Milton, a Baron both of England and Ireland, was created Earl of Dorchester in Dorsetshire, 1792.

Milton, Viscount.—From Milton Abbey, the Seat of the Family, in Dorsetshire. The Title of Viscount was granted by the Patent in 1792.

Dorchester, Baron[235] (Carleton).—Sir Guy Carleton, K. B. was created Baron of Dorchester in Oxfordshire, 1786. Sir Dudley Carleton was created Baron Carleton 1626, and Viscount Dorchester in Oxfordshire 1628. It is, however, denied by the Heralds that Sir Guy is of that Family.

Leeds, Duke (Osborne).—From the Town of Leeds in Yorkshire.

Carmarthen, Marquis.—From Carmarthen in Wales.

Danby, Earl.—From a Castle of the name in Cleveland, a District of Yorkshire.

Albemarle, Earl.—otherwise Aumerle, and Aumale [Albo Marla, or White Marle], from a Town in Normandy, which gave Title to a Peer of France. It was conferred by William III. when at war with Louis XIV.

Bury, Viscount (Keppel).—In Suffolk.

Harrington, Earl (Stanhope[236]).—From a Village in Northamptonshire.

Petersham, Viscount (Stanhope).—A Village near Richmond in Surrey[237].

Suffolk, Earl.—From the County.

Bindon, Viscount (Howard).—In Dorsetshire. It was the Seat of Lord Marney (A. D. 1607); and came to this Branch of the Family of Howard by a Marriage with the Heiress of Lord Marney[238].

Shipbrooke, Viscount.—Richard Vernon was possessed of the Barony of Shipbroke, in Cheshire, in the time of Richard the First[239].

Orwell, Baron (Vernon).—Vernon, Baron of Shipbroke, was one of the Barons (of the Palatinate of Chester) created by Hugh Lupus, the first Norman Earl of Chester. Extinct[240].

Beaulieu, Earl; Beaulieu, Baron (Hussey-Montague).—Beaulieu is an Abbey in Hampshire, and was part of the Estate of John (Montagu) Duke of Montagu, inherited by his Daughter and Co-heiress the Duchess of Manchester, who married Sir Edward Hussey, K. B. Upon this marriage he took the additional name of Montague.

Vernon, Baron (Vernon).—The Title is nominal and local, from Vernon in Normandy[241]. The Descent is from Hamon de Massie-Venables, of Kinderton, in Cheshire, who was one of Hugh Lupus's Palatinate Barons, as Earl of Chester.

Harcourt, Earl.—The Title is from the Name, which is local, from a Town in Normandy, and which is also the Title of a French Dukedom.

Nuneham, Viscount (Harcourt).—From the Earl's Seat in Oxfordshire. The Earldom was erected in 1749.

Grafton, Duke.—From a Village in Northamptonshire, which was erected into an Honour, and conferred by King Charles II. on his Natural Son by the Duchess of Cleveland.

Euston, Earl (Fitzroy).—From the Seat in Suffolk.

Devonshire, Duke (Cavendish).—From the County. Descended from a Gentleman Usher to Cardinal Wolsey[242].

Hartington, Marquis (Cavendish).—From an obscure Village (the Property of the Duke) in the Peak of Derbyshire.

Dorset, Duke.—From the County. Sir Lionel Cranfield, Knight, Lord Cranfield, &c. was a Shop-keeper in London, as his Father had been before him[243].

Effingham, Earl (Howard).—From Effingham in Surrey, a Seat of this Branch of the Family, and where there was a Castle.

Sussex, Earl.—From the County.

Longueville, Viscount (Yelverton).—Sir Henry Yelverton, the Second Baronet, married Susan Baroness Grey of Ruthyn, Daughter and sole Heiress of Charles Longueville, Lord Grey of Ruthyn. To this Title the eldest Son of Sir Henry succeeded on the death of his Mother (being a Barony in Fee); and was followed by his Brother Henry, who was created Viscount Longueville 1690. Talbot Yelverton, the eldest Son of Henry, was created Earl of Sussex in 1717.

Beaufort, Duke.—Henry Beaufort, third Duke of Somerset, temp. Henry VII. had a Natural Son, to whom he gave the names of Charles Somerset (afterwards a Knight), whose Descendant was created Duke of Beaufort. Thus, by a Child of Casualty, the Name and Title have changed positions; as what was Beaufort Duke of Somerset is now Somerset Duke of Beaufort.

Worcester, Marquis (Somerset). From the City.

Manchester, Duke.—From the Town.

Mandeville, Viscount (Montagu).—A nominal Title from Geoffrey de Mandeville, who possessed Kimbolton, the Seat of the Family, temp. Guil. Conq.[244]

Mandeville is a Village in Normandy (a corruption of Magnaville, i. e. Magna Villa), which gave name to the person who accompanied William the Conqueror[245].

Waldegrave, Earl.—Waldegrave is a Village in Northamptonshire.

Chewton, Viscount (Waldegrave).—From a place in Somersetshire[246].

Mount-Edgecumbe, Earl.—Baron Edgecumbe by Creation, 1742. Earl of Mount-Edgecumbe by Creation, 1789. From the Family Seat in Cornwall.

Valletort, Viscount (Edgecumbe).—From an old Norman Barony (De Valle Tortâ), with Lands annexed, in Devonshire, the property of the Family[247].

Gainsborough, Earl.—From the Town.

Campden, Viscount (Noel).—Campden is in Gloucestershire.

Sir Baptist Hicks, created Viscount Campden 1628, left two Daughters, the elder of whom married Lord Noel, one of whose Descendants (Edward) was created Earl of Gainsborough 1682.

Digby, Earl.—This Title, when a Barony, was nominal (though local in itself, from Digby, co. Lincoln) till Henry, the late Peer, was created Earl of Digby in 1790. He dying in 1793, was succeeded by Edward the present Earl.

Coleshill, Viscount (Digby).—In Warwickshire. The Manor of Coleshill was forfeited by Sir Simon Montfort, on a charge of High Treason in supporting Perkin Warbeck; when it was given to Simon Digby, then Deputy Constable of Coleshill Castle[248].

Montagu, or Montacute, Viscount (Browne).—From a high Hill in a Village in Somersetshire; where William Earl of Moreton, Maternal Brother to William the Conqueror, built a Castle, which, as it rises from its base to a sharp point, he called Mons acutus. Thus far the tradition; and Bishop Gibson, in his Edition of Camden's Britannia, allows this to have been the place from which Sir Anthony Browne, the first Viscount, had the Title[249].

Rutland, Duke.—From the County.

Granby, Marquis (Manners).—From a Village in Nottinghamshire.

The Barony of Roos of Hamlake[250] gives Title to the eldest Son of a Marquis of Granby, in his Father's life-time.

Kent, Duke.—From the County.

Harold, Earl (Grey), Extinct.—From a place of the name in Bedfordshire.

There was in this Family the Viscounty of Gooderich, from Gooderich Castle in Herefordshire.

Abingdon, Earl.—In Berkshire.

Norreys, Baron (Bertie).—James Bertie, the first Earl of Abingdon (who was the second Son of Montagu Bertie, the second Earl of Lindsey) was the Issue of a second Wife; viz. Bridget Baroness Norreys of Rycote in her own right. He had Summons to Parliament as Baron Norreys in 1572, and was created Earl of Abingdon in 1682[251].

Dacre, Baron (Roper, late Barrett-Leonard).—Originally both nominal and local, the first Peer having been Dacre of Dacre Castle in Cumberland.

Being a Barony in Fee, it has had owners of different names[252].

Godolphin, Earl.—From a Hill (perhaps anciently a Seigniory) in Cornwall. The proper name is Godolcan, corrupted into Godolphin. The word signifies, in the Cornish language, "White Eagle;" agreeably to which, the Arms of the Family are, "Gules, an Eagle displayed between three Fleurs de Lis Argent[253]."

Rialton, Viscount.—From a Village in Cornwall[254].

Tankerville, Earl.—Originally from a Town and Castle in Normandy[255]. The present Title is derived from Ford Lord Grey of Werk, who was created Earl of Tankerville (a dormant Title in his Family) in 1695. This Earl left an only Daughter, who married Charles Bennet, Baron of Ussulston, who was afterwards (1714) created Earl of Tankerville.

Ussulston, Baron (Bennet).—From one of the Hundreds of Middlesex.

Arlington, Earl.—The Title was derived from Arlington in Middlesex, the Seat of Sir Henry Bennet, who was created Baron Arlington 1664, and Earl of Arlington in 1672. He died in 1685.

Thetford, Viscount (Bennet), Extinct.—In Norfolk.

Bridgewater, Duke (Egerton).—The Lord Chancellor was the founder of this Family, and was a Natural Son of Sir Richard Egerton, Knight, of Ridley in Cheshire, by the Daughter of one Sparks of Bickerton[256].

Grey de Wilton, Baron (Egerton).—The present Peer (Sir Thomas Egerton, Bart.) is descended from Bridget, sole Sister and Heir to Thomas Lord Grey of Wilton, a Female Barony, denominated from Wilton in the County of Hereford[257].

Hertford, Earl.—From the Town.

Beauchamp, Viscount (Conway).—Nominal and local, from a place in Normandy.

Scarborough, Earl.—From Scarborough in Yorkshire.

Lumley, Viscount (Lumley, with the additional name of Sanderson).—From Lumley Castle, in the Bishoprick of Durham.

Rivers, Baron (Pitt).—The first of the name, De Redvers, came hither with William the Conqueror, and was made Earl of Devonshire. Baldwin de Redveriis (or Riveriis), Earl of Devonshire, had Estates in the neighbourhood of Exeter[258].

George Pitt, Ancestor of the present Lord Rivers (created in 1776), married Jane Daughter of Savage, Earl Rivers of Rock-Savage in Cheshire, Relict of George, the sixth Lord Chandos. She brought a large Estate to her second Husband, partly as Heiress of Savage Earl Rivers, and partly from her first Husband.

Darlington, Earl.—From Darlington, in the Bishoprick of Durham.

Barnard, Viscount (Vane).—From Barnard-Castle, in the Bishoprick of Durham.

Brownlow, Baron (Cust).—A nominal Title; for Sir Richard Cust, Bart. married Anne Daughter of Sir William Brownlow, Bart. Sister, and at length Heir, to John Brownlow, Viscount Tyrconnel, of the Kingdom of Ireland, seated at Belton in Lincolnshire.

Hawkesbury, Baron (Jenkinson).—Though this Family is styled of Walcot in Oxfordshire, it was originally seated at Hawkesbury in Gloucestershire.

Heathfield, Baron (Eliot).—Sir George Augustus Eliot, K. B. who commanded at Gibraltar during the celebrated Siege, chose this place in Sussex (his property) for his Title. It is said that the decisive Battle, called "The Battle of Hastings," was fought on this spot[259].

Camden, Marquis.—From his House at Chislehurst in Kent, formerly the residence of Camden the celebrated Antiquary, and now called Camden Place.

Bayham, Viscount (Pratt).—From Bayham Abbey, in Sussex, an Estate in the Family of Pratt, and now in possession of the Marquis.

Dynevor, Baroness (Rice and De Cardonel).—From Dinevawr in Caermarthenshire. She is the Daughter of the first Earl Talbot, and Widow of George Rice, Esquire. In the year 1780 the Earl was created Baron of Dinevawr, with limitation to his Daughter and her Issue male; and which took place on the Earl's death, in 1782. She enjoyed the Title till her death, 1793, when it descended to her eldest Son George Talbot Rice, who, in pursuance of the Will of his Grandmother, Lady Talbot (whose maiden name was De Cardonel), changed his Name, Arms, and Crest, to those of De Cardonel only, by Sign Manual, in May 1793 [See the Gazette].[260]

Newcastle, Duke (Holles).—From Sir William Holles, Lord Mayor of London[261].

Holderness, Earl (Darcy), Extinct.—For the origin of the Family, see Leland's Itinerary, vol. VI. p. 24.

Northampton, Marquis (Parr), Extinct.—For the origin of this Family, see also Leland's Itinerary, vol. VIII. p. 96.

Edward IV. is by Shakespeare made to say that he would bear Three fair shining Suns on his Target, from the time he is said to have seen Three Suns at one time. (Hen. VI. Part III. Act ii. Sc. i.)[262]

Monteagle.—Stanley, Baron of Monteagle, so entitled for his valour at Flodden Field, because his Ancestors bore an Eagle for their Crest. Vide Hon. Anglic, p. 109.

Carey.—In the Reign of Henry V. was held, at Smithfield, a Just between Robert Carey of the West, Son of Sir John Carey, Knight, and a Foreign Knight, of the Kingdom of Aragon. Carey vanquished the Aragonese, and took his Coat Armour in lieu of his own; viz. "Argent, on a Bend Sable, Three Roses of the First:" which have ever since been borne by the name of Carey, whose antient Coat was "Gules, a Chevron between Three Swans Proper, one whereof they still retain in their Crest[263]."

N. B. These are the Arms of Carey; though, from the words "of the West," one would think Carew was intended. But the account agrees with the Arms of Viscount Falkland.

Cooper and Cowper.—Cooper Earl of Shaftesbury bears Three Bulls: Cowper Earl Cowper does not.

"The Eagle and Child" having been adopted as the Crest of the Earl of Derby, its Origin is a circumstance of no small curiosity.

Nothing is more common than for a Tenant or Dependant to take the Crest of his Lord or Chief for a Sign; which will account for the greatest part of the Bulls' Heads, Griffins, Falcons, Lions, Boars, &c. in the Kingdom. Thus from one quarter they straggled into different places, as those people who had occasion for Signs emigrated from their own Counties and Districts. Amongst these the Sign in question is one; and is to be found in various places that have no present connexion with the original, the Importer of such Device being, perhaps, long since dead. This, being the Crest or Cognizance of the Stanleys, Earls of Derby, it most probably was first used in Lancashire, and the parts contiguous, as a Sign.

I at first conceived it to be a fabulous affair; but find, from good and respectable authorities, that there is not only probable, but substantial History contained in it; as the major part of the Estate is derived to the Family from the Issue of the very Child in question. The first account of this matter I shall give from "A Survey of the Isle of Man[264]," of which the Stanleys were for several ages Kings and Lords, holding of the Kings of England, by Grant of Henry IV. (anno 7), by Homage and the Service of a[265] Cast (of Falcons), payable on Coronations. The Stanleys were Kings as much as any Tributary King whatsoever, making Laws, &c. They appeared on a certain day in Royal Array, sitting in a Chair, covered with a Royal Cloth and Cushions, with their Visage to the East; the Sword borne before them, with the point upwards; with their Barons, Knights, Squires, &c. about them. Such were the Descendants of the Child we are going to speak of more largely.

Sir John Stanley (temp. Richard II.) was a Knight of the greatest fame in matters of Chivalry; who, having been a great Traveller, was known for his prowess in most parts of Europe. On his return, he was followed by a Frenchman, who challenged the whole English Nation. Sir John accepted his challenge, fought, and slew him in the presence of the King. This addition to his fame raised his reputation among the men, and procured him so much favour with the ladies, that he attracted the particular attention of the Heiress of the Family of Latham, who was young, rich, and beautiful. Sir John, with the true spirit of Errantry, declared it was for her he fought; and at length, contrary to the inclination of her Father, married the Lady.

Mr. Sacheverell then relates the story which gave birth to this appendage to the Armorial Bearing of the Stanley Family. These are his words:

"The Lord of Latham and his Lady, being Childless, as they were walking in the Park, heard a Child crying in an Eagle's nest: they immediately ordered their servants to search the Eyery, who presented them with a beautiful Boy, in rich swadling-cloaths. The good old lady looked upon it as a present sent from Heaven, ordered it to be carefully educated, and gave it the Surname of Latham. He (the Child) was knighted by King Edward III. by the name of Sir Oskytel Latham, and left sole Heir of that vast estate. He had one daughter, named Isabella, who by marriage brought the honours of Latham and Knowsley, with many other Lordships, to Sir John Stanley."

Mr. Sacheverell goes no further into the Story; and the Reader will be naturally inclined to know whose Child this was, and how it was conveyed into the Eagle's nest. For this we must have recourse to Sir William Dugdale[266], who relates the Story more circumstantially, and, as he says, upon credible tradition; viz. That a Sir Thomas de Latham had a natural Son, called Oskytel, by an obscure woman, who lived near him; and, "having no Child by his Lady, he designed to adopt this Oskytel for his Heir; but so that he himself might not be suspected to have been the Father. Observing, therefore, that an Eagle had built her Nest in a large spread oak within his Park at Lathom, he caused the Child in swadling cloaths to be privily conveyed thither; and (as a wonder) presently called forth his Wife to see it; representing to her, that, having no Issue, God Almighty had thus sent him a Male Child, and so preserved, that he looked upon it as a miracle; disguising the truth so artificially from her, that she forthwith took him (the Child) with great fondness into the house, educating him with no less affection than if she had been his natural Mother; whereupon he became Heir to that fair inheritance; and that, in token thereof, not only his Descendants, whilst the Male Line endured, but the Stanleys proceeding from the said Isabel (the Heir Female), have ever since borne the Child in the Eagle's Nest, with the Eagle thereon, for their Crest.

Francis Bourgeois, Member of the Royal Academy, had leave from King George III. to wear the Polish Order "Merentibus." The Diploma is dated Warsaw, February 16, 1791. Ordered to be registered in the College of Arms.

Lewkenor.—Sir Lewis, Master of the Ceremonies; from one of the Hundreds of Lincolnshire, called anciently Levechenora[267].

Kempe.—The same as Champion. The Danish word[268].

Misenor.—From Mesonero, an Inn-keeper; Spanish.

Muncaster.—The old name of Newcastle upon Tyne; quasi Monk-Caster. The present name was perhaps taken on its being rebuilt.

Mease.—From Meze, a messuage[269].

Hugesson.—Cardinal Hugezun came over as the Pope's Legate, temp. Henry II.[270]

Dempster.—The Judges of the Isle of Man were called Deemsters[271].

Eldred.—There was an Archbishop of York of the name of Aldred, temp. William the Conqueror. Perhaps contracted from Alured, the Latin of Alfred.

Brettell.—There is a Seignory in Normandy of the name of Bretteville. So we have corrupted the name of Frescheville into Fretwell.

Belassis.—Something of this name may be seen in Brady's History, p. 196.

Larpent.—From the French, L'Arpent; Arpent signifying an acre. We drop the apostrophe.

Duppa.—De Uphaugh and, by apostrophe, D'Uphaugh, according to Anthony Wood.

Firmin.—From St. Fermin in France.

Paliser.—An official name of such person or persons who had the care of the pales of a forest[272].

Ord.—Signifies a Promontory in the Highland; and, I presume, is Erse[273].

Bownas and Bonas.—Corrupted from Buchan-Ness, the seat of the Earl of Errol[274].

Ridgeway.—A local term for the way of the ford, or passage over a stream. Ryd and Rith signifying a ford[275].

Fitzherbert.—It is written Filius-Herberti in very old deeds[276]. The Finches were called Finch-Herbert formerly; which led Daniel Earl of Winchelsea to think he was related to the Fitzherberts. Thus Leland: "The Finches that be now, say, that theire propre name is Hereberte; and that with mariage of the Finche-Heyre, they tooke the Finche's name, and were called Finche-Herebert, joining booth names[277]."

Herbert of Kent married the heiress of Finch, and took that name as a prefix, which they soon corrupted into Fitz-herbert. But the Fitzherberts were a family before the Finches were fledged; and in old deeds the name is given Filius Herberti.

Champernoun.—Devonshire: a corruption of Campernulph, or De Campo Arnulphi; called, says Camden, Champernoun[278].

Smelt.—Ralph Luvel (or Lovel) an ancestor of the Percivals, was, in the time of King Stephen, called also Simelt, for which no reason is given[279].

Names of Men, of Places, and Things, have changed, and by seeming corruption have come right again.

Thus, for Men.

I take this to be a local name, from Osbaldiston in Lancashire, q. Osbald his Town. There is in Yorkshire Osbaldwick, pronounced Osberwick. It should be Oswald, a Bishop of York and Martyr, in both cases.

We have the name Bernardiston, from a place of the name in Suffolk[281].

Robertsbridge, in Sussex, appears to be a corruption of Rothersbridge, as it was long called, and with plausibility; for it is situated on the river Rother: but the former is the truth, as I have been informed that in old Latin deeds it is styled Pons Roberti.

There are some terms which, by a double corruption, have got home again; as Crevisses, in Derbyshire; where Crevise, the word for a Cray-fish, is a corruption: but it gets home by it; for the French word from whence cray-fish was first formed, is ecrevisse. This too is the radical word; for the lobster is but a species of it, and called l'ecrevisse de mer, or sea-cray-fish; what is now called the sea-cray-fish, is properly the lobster. This difference consists in the want of claws.

OR,

An Attempt to Elucidate some of the more Obscure Armorial Bearings, principally the Mottoes used by many of the Scottish Families.

In a Letter to the Earl of Leicester, President of the Society of Antiquaries,

"Arma Viramque."

There seems to be something peculiarly significant and quaint in the greatest part of the Mottoes and Devices used by the Scottish Nobility, and perhaps in those of many Families of inferior Rank; though these last do not so easily come under our observation.

My intention is, to trouble your Lordship with my thoughts on a few of these Mottoes (as we call them); and refer to your extensive knowledge in the science of Heraldry, and your love of investigation, for the rest of these obscure impreses.

We must, however, distinguish between the Motto and the Slug horn (or, as Sir George Mackenzie gives it, upon the more Southern pronunciation, Slogan[282]); the latter being a cry de guerre, whereas the former (though one may sometimes answer both purposes) seems more to relate to some historical circumstance by which the Family have been signalized. The original idea of these words, I have no doubt, related to War, and operated as what we now call the Watch-Word, and more emphatically the Word by the circulation of which the King can, at this day, call his guards about him, as the Chiefs of Scotland formerly assembled their Vassals in their respective divisions or clans. The French call it a Mot; and the Italians, by an augmentation, Motto; which last we have adopted when we speak in an heraldic style. The true Scottish term is a Ditton, the Slughorn being properly the cry de Guerre. Not to go into the antiquity of Mottoes, or Armory, further than the subject in question shall lead me, I shall content myself with observing that Armorial Bearings in general, with us in England, have little more than the fancy of the party, with Heraldic sanction, for their foundation; or some distant allusion to the name. Take one singular instance of this last case, which Mr. Boyer (in his Theatre of Honour) gives, as a whimsical bearing. The Arms of the name of Matthias are three Dice (sixes as the highest throw), having, I make no doubt (though Mr. Boyer gives no reason for it), a reference to the election of St. Matthias into the Apostleship: "And the lot fell upon Matthias." One of the writers in the Antiquarian Discourses (Mr. Agarde) thinks the old Motto of the Caves, of Stanford, in Northamptonshire, a happy conceit; the ancient Crest being a Grey-hound currant, with a label issuing out of its mouth, with these words, "Adsum; Cave." Had the Cavè stood alone, without the Dog or the Adsum, it might have been very well, and have operated religiously, morally, or politically: but otherwise the Dog seems to run away with the Wit. The Family, since Mr. Agarde's time, appear to have been sensible of this awkward compound, and have adopted the French word Gardez for the Motto; though I think they had better have kept the Cavè (as I have observed), and hanged the Grey-hound; though perhaps it was conceived at the time the Adsum was dropped, that Ca-vè, in the Latin, might be confounded with the English, Cave; and that it would have appeared as if they had taken the name for the Motto, without another Latin word to denote that language; and therefore might take Gardez, which shews itself to be French.

Mr. Agarde's own Motto is much more apposite to his name; which, he tells us at the end of his Memoir, was, Dieu me Garde; but at the same time this would have admitted of improvement; for the French verb Garder was originally Agarder, which, had he known it, would have enabled him to have made the pun complete—Dieu m'Agarde.

Before I quit the subject in general, I cannot help mentioning a bon mot of a friend of mine (and he has so much wit that I shall not rob him in the least by the repetition), on his visiting Chatsworth, to see the house. The Motto of the noble owner is, as your Lordship well knows, Cavendo Tutus, to which the Family has happily adhered in their Political concerns. The state rooms in that house are floored with old oak, waxed, and very slippery, in consequence of which my friend had very near fallen down; when, recovering his equilibrium, he observed, "that he rather supposed the Motto related to the floors than the name."

But it is time to lead to the matter I proposed, viz. the Scottish Mottoes; and yet, before I proceed to them, I wish to premise something on the grounds of a few of the Armorial Bearings among the most ancient Scottish Families, which have originated from History.

The principal Family of the name of
Douglas

carries "A Man's Heart Gules," as a fixed principal Charge, because the Good Sir James Douglas, as he is styled, carried the Heart of King Robert I. (of the name of Bruce) to Jerusalem, and there interred it[283]. The original Coat Armour of Douglas was, "Azure, in chief Three Stars Argent[284]." The Heart is now imperially crowned; but that is a later introduction[285], not borne at least by those who merely quartered the Arms.

Campbell,

Duke of Argyle, Marquis of Lorn, &c. bears in the Second and Third Quarters (for the Lordship of Lorn) a Feudal Charge of "Or, a Limphad (or small Ship) Sable, with Flames of Fire issuing out of the Top of the Mast, and from the Fore and Hindermost Parts of the Ship:" which Fire, says my Author, was called in old blazonry St. Anthony's Fire. The reason is, that, as the Territory lay upon the Coast, this Bearing was indicative of the Tenure by which the Lands were held in capite; viz. by supplying a Ship with twenty Oars in time of War, if required. The Reddendum runs, for the provision of "Unam navem viginti Remorum, si petatur, tempore Belli, &c."[286]

By Marriage, this Lordship, after many generations, came into the Family of Campbell, then Earl of Argyle; but, in process of time, the Flames issuing from the Ship have been extinguished.

This was not an uncommon Armorial Appendage to other Feudal Lords, and Lordships similarly situated.

Thus the Arms of the Isle of Arran are, "Argent, a Ship, with its Sails furled, Sable."

The Earls of Orkney and Caithness have the Bearing of a Ship for the like reason; being Lordships, or Feudal Earldoms, situate on the Coast; but with Differences.

The Earl of Orkney (and from thence the Earl of Caithness) bears a Ship of a more modern form, with three Masts; but it has the honour of being within a double Tressure, counter-fleured, to shew its connexion with Royalty.

Drummond

carries, "Or, Three Bars wavy Gules." This simple Bearing, we are told, involves a Piece of History; for that an Hungarian Gentleman, of the name of Maurice, in the Reign of Malcolm III. had the command of a Ship in which Edgar Atheline, his Mother Agatha, and his Sisters Margaret and Christian, were embarked, in their return from England to Hungary. A Storm arose, and drove them on the Coast of Scotland, where they were landed in the Frith of Forth, and entertained by the King, who afterwards married Margaret. This Maurice so ingratiated himself with King Malcolm, that he was solicited by the King to settle in Scotland, which he did, and had grants of many Lands; and particularly those at Drymen or Drummond, of which last he took the name. Drummond, as we must now call him, was afterwards appointed Seneschal of Lenox; and the King assigned him the above Arms, alluding to his original Profession of a Naval Officer, and in memory of his having conducted the then Queen safe through the Storm into the Port in Scotland[287].

Seton Earl of Winton.

The Paternal Arms of Seton, afterwards Earls of Winton, were Crescents, for which no particular reason appears: but the Lords of Seton have for some hundreds of years carried, "Or, a Sword erected in pale, supporting an Imperial Crown Proper, betwixt Three Crescents within a Double Tressure, counter-fleured, Gules." This honourable Augmentation was granted by Robert the Bruce to his Nephew Sir Alexander Seton, of that Ilk, for the special and seasonable services performed by him and his Father Sir Christopher to that Monarch during the time of his troubles. Sir Christopher Seton, it seems, had lost two Estates of great value, one in Scotland, the other in England, together with his Life, in the Service of his King and Country; upon which account King Robert (whose Sister, Christian Bruce, Sir Christopher had married), when he had overcome his Enemies, restored his Nephew, Sir Alexander Seton, to the Lands in Scotland which his Father had lost, though he could not re-possess him of the English Estate; granted the Augmentation of the Sword and Crown to his Paternal Coat-Armour, to perpetuate their gallant Actions; and added the Double Tressure, which at that time was given to none but such as had married, or were descended from, Daughters of the Blood-Royal[288]. One branch of the Family, viz. Sir Alexander Seton of Pitwedden (at one time a Lord of Session), upon the event of the death of his Father, who, in the Reign of King Charles I. (during the Civil Commotions) was killed by a Shot from the King's Enemies, with a Banner in his hand, assumed the Armorial Bearing of "An Heart distilling Drops of Blood[289]."

These, my Lord, I offer in the line of Nobility, as Historical Bearings; but many may likewise be found among the Gentry, who have Armorial Devices allusive to gallant actions, high employments, or other honourable circumstances.

Of those, the few that follow, most easily occur, from the works of that laborious Herald, Mr. Alexander Nisbet.

Graham

of Inchbrackie, descended of an eldest Son, of a second Marriage, of the first Earl of Montrose, gives, "Or, a Dyke [or Wall] fess-wise, Azure, broken down in several parts, &c." The Dyke there is assumed, to difference the Bearer from his Chief, and to perpetuate that action of Gramus (one of the Predecessors of the noble Family of Graham) in pulling down the Wall [anno 420] built by the Roman Emperor Severus, which was thereafter called "Graham's Dyke."

N. B. By the Dyke the Scots seem to mean the Wall, i.e. the Vallum, which is formed out of the Dyke.

Clark

of Pennycuik. Sir John Clark, of Pennycuik, had this Motto, "Free for a Blast," which is explained in part by the Crest, which is a Man blowing a Horn: but for both the Crest itself, and the Motto, we must look into the Tenure of the Estate, which they derived, most probably by Marriage, from the Pennycuiks of that Ilk, an old Family in Mid-Lothian, who bore "Or, a Fess between Three Hunting Horns Sable, stringed Gules;" and, by the ancient Tenure of their Lands, were obliged, once a year, to attend in the Forest of Drumsleich, since called Barrowmuir, to give a Blast of a Horn at the King's Hunting.

The Clarks, holding by the same Tenure, preserved the Motto.

Kirkpatrick,

who gave the last Blow to Cummin, supposed to have been slain, cried out, "Lest he should not be quite dead, I will secure him," and stabbed him with his Dagger. Hence the Family took the Crest of "A Hand holding a Dagger in Pale, distilling Drops of Blood;" and with the Motto "I'll make sicker (sure);" or, "I'll make sure."[290]

Carrick.

Stewart, Earl of Carrick. The Paternal Arms of Stewart, out of which was a Lion naissant, all within a Double Tressure, counter-fleured Gules: the Lion naissant intimating his original right to the Crown[291].

Farquharson,

of Invercald, carries, in addition to his Paternal Coat, "Argent, a Fir Tree growing out of a Mount Proper on a Chief Gules,—the Banner of Scotland in Bend, and on a Canton of the first (viz. Or), a Dexter Hand couped at the wrist, grasping a Dagger, point downwards, Gules." Mr. Nisbet says[292], they carried the Fir Trees because their Country abounded with such Trees; the Hand grasping a Dagger, for killing the Cumming; and the Banner is lately added, because the Grand-father of the present John Farquharson (1702) was killed at the Battle of Pinkie, carrying the Banner of Scotland.

Wood.

The Chiefs of this name have given Trees in different forms; but Wood of Largoe placed his Tree between Two Ships under sail, as Admiral to King James III. and IV. in whose reigns he defeated the English with an inferior Force. Another Branch of the Family gave a Hunting-horn hanging upon the Branch of a Tree, to shew he was the King's Forester[293].

Forbes,

of Watertown, charges his Coat with an "Escocheon Argent, a Sword and Key in Saltire Gules," as being Constable of Aberdeen: and for a Difference from the Grays, places a Quill or Pen in the Paw of the Lion in the Arms of Gray, because his Ancestor was Sheriff's Clerk of Angus[294].

John Ramsay,

descended of the Ramsays of Wylicleuch in the Merss, who was Page to King James VI. thereafter Earl of Holdernesse, got for addition to his Paternal Bearing, "An Arm holding a naked Sword enfilé of a Crown, with a Man's Heart on the point," because he rescued King James VI. from the Conspiracy of the Earl of Gowrie and his Confederates. The Paternal Coat was, "Argent, an Eagle displayed Sable."[295] These are what the Scottish Heralds call "Arms of Special Concession."[296]

Ayton,

of Kippo. This Family bears "A Baton Peri Or, couped;" which, Mr. Nisbet says, is an uncommon Bearing for a younger legitimate Son, it being a mark of Bastardy by its position; but he tells us, the Baton of this description, and thus borne, was granted to Sir John Ayton of Kippo, Knight, by King Charles II. as an Augmentation, because he had been Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod to that King. Upon the Family Coat he therefore carried "A Baton Sable, charged on the top with one of the Lions of England."

Stirling,

of Glorat, carries "Argent, on a Bend engrailed Azure, Three Buckles Or; a Chief Gules, charged with a Naked Arm issuing out of a Cloud from the Sinister side, grasping a Sword in pale, and therewith guarding an Imperial Crown; all within a double Tressure, counterfleured of Thistles Vert." Which honourable Addition was granted to this Family for special Services done to King Charles I. and King Charles II. in their Troubles.

Binning,

of Easter Binning, a Cadet of Binning of that Ilk, who carried "Argent, a Bend engrailed Sable," added, for Difference, on the Bend, a Waggon of the first, because he and his seven Sons went in a Waggon covered with Hay, and surprised and took the Castle of Linlithgow, then in the possession of the English, in the Reign of David the Bruce[297].

Lockart.

This Name now bears a Man's Heart Proper, within a Padlock Sable, in perpetuation, they tell you, that one of the Name accompanied the good Sir James Douglas to Jerusalem, with the Heart of King Robert the Bruce. Be that as it may, it is intended to play upon the Name; and, to preserve the Story the more entire, some Branches of the Family have strengthened it by the Motto, "Corda serata Pando" [some have it, Fero]. These Devices are differently placed by different Branches; but Mr. Nisbet insinuates[298] that this Bearing is an assumption of a modern date; and that the old Arms were, till within a century before he wrote [1702], "Three Boars' Heads erazed; the Crest, a Dexter Hand holding a Boar's Head erazed, Proper; the Motto, 'Feroci Fortior.'"

Norfolk.

The Duke of Norfolk has an augmentation, viz. an Escocheon Or, in the middle of the Bend, charged with a Demi-Lion Rampant, pierced through the Mouth with an Arrow, within a double Tressure counterfleur'd Gules; which was granted by King Henry VIII. for his services at the Battle of Flodden Field[299].

Besides these and many other Bearings, not at this day easily, if at all, to be accounted for, the Scots have, like ourselves, several that are responsive to the Name. Of these I have selected the few which follow, and have given their material Charge, without attending to the Colours, or to the Blazonry of the whole. Thus

Cockburn has a Charge of Three Cocks.

Craw and Craufurd, Three Crows[300].

Fraser, Three Frases or Cinquefoils.

Falconer, a Falcon.

Forester, Three Bugle Horns; and the Peer of that Name and Title has for his Motto, "Blow, Hunter, thy Horn."

Heart, Three Men's Hearts.

Hog, Three Boars' Heads.

Justice, A Sword in Pale, supporting a Balance.

Skene, Three Daggers, in the Scottish Language called Skenes.

The Motto of Dalziel, Earl of Carnwarth, now an attainted Title, is, "I Dare;" the reason of which is given by Crawfurd, in his Peerage of Scotland. The ancient armorial bearing of this Family was, A Man hanging on a Gallows, though it is now only a Naked Man with his Arms expanded. Some one of the Family having, perhaps, dropped the Gallows and the Rope, as deeming it an ignominious Bearing.

But to proceed to the Motto. The Historian says, that a Favourite of Kenneth II. having been hanged by the Picts, and the King being much concerned that the Body should be exposed in so disgraceful a situation, offered a large Reward to him who would rescue the Body. Alpinus, the Father of Kenneth, with many of his Nobles, had been inhumanly put to death; and the Head of the King (Alpinus), placed upon a Pole, was exposed to the Populace. It was not for the redemption of his Father's Body, that the new King, Kenneth, offered the Reward; but for that of some young Favourite, perhaps of equal age, who was thus ignominiously hanging as a public spectacle, for the King appears to have been beheaded.[301] This being an enterprize of great danger, no one was found bold enough to undertake it, till a Gentleman came to the King and said, "Dal Ziel," i.e. "I Dare," and accordingly performed the hazardous exploit. In memory of this circumstance, the Family took the above-mentioned Coat-Armour, and likewise the Name of Dalziel, with the interpretation of it, "I Dare," as a Motto. The Maiden Name (as I may call it) of this Family is not recorded, neither is the original Coat Armour of the Gentleman mentioned. These circumstances are related by Crawfurd, upon the authority of Mr. Nisbet, in his Marks of Cadency, p. 41.

Occasional changes in Coats of Arms, it is very well known, have always been common, owing to accidents and incidents, as well as atchievements, several instances of which may be seen in Camden's Remains.

Similar to the case of Dalziel, is the reason given for the Motto of Maclellan, Lord Kircudbright, which is, "Think on." Crawfurd's account is to this effect. A Company of Saracens, from Ireland, in the Reign of King James II. infested the County of Galloway, whereupon the King issued a Proclamation, declaring that "Whoever should disperse them, and bring their Captain, dead or alive, should have the Barony of Bombie for his reward." This was performed by the Son of the Laird of Bombie, who brought the Head of the Captain, on the Point of his Sword, to the King, who put him into the immediate possession of the Barony; to perpetuate which action, the Baron took for his Crest a Moor's Head, on the Point of a Sword, with the words "Think on," for his Motto.

It may be difficult to ascertain the meaning of these words; and one is at liberty either to suppose he addressed them to the King on the occasion, as if he had said "Think on your Promise:"—or they may apply to Posterity, advising them to Think on the gallant Action whereby they became ennobled: but I more incline to the former interpretation, because, in Yorkshire, which abounds with Scottish idioms, words, and proverbs, they say, "I will do so and so when I think on;" and "I would have done so and so, but I did not think on," Our expression is, "Think of it."

Maxwell, of Calderwood, has the same Motto, on a different idea. The Crest is "A Man's Head looking upright," to which the Motto seems to give a religious interpretation, and to imply, "Think on" Eternity[302].

A similar change appears to have been brought about, by religious attachments, in the Crest and Motto of Bannerman, which seems to extend to the rest of the Armorial Bearings. Sir Alexander Bannerman of Elsick, the chief, bore, "Gules, a Banner displayed Argent, and thereon a Canton Azure, charged with a St. Andrew's Cross. Crest, a Demi-Man in Armour, holding in his Right Hand a Sword Proper. Motto, Pro Patriâ." This Bearing is by Grant, 1692; but a younger Son of this House bore (when Mr. Nisbet wrote) the Field and Banner as above, "within a Bordure Argent, charged with Four Buckles Azure, and as many Holly-Leaves Vert, alternately." Buckles, in certain case we shall see hereafter, admit of a religious interpretation, and the Holly-Leaves (quasi Holy-Leaves), seem to have a similar import, especially when added to the new Crest, viz. "A Man issuing out of the Wreath in a Priest's habit, and praying posture," with this Motto, "Hæc prestat Militia[303]." This change might possibly take place about the enthusiastic time of the Union of the two Kingdoms, when religious party spirit ran high in Scotland[304].

Ross, Lord Ross, has the same Motto as Dalziel Earl of Carnwath; but on what pretensions does not appear.

I shall now proceed to another conjectural interpretation, as to the Motto of Lord Napier; which is, "Ready, aye Ready." Sir Alexander Napier was killed at the Battle of Flodden Field (1513), leaving Issue Alexander, who married Margaret, the Daughter of Sir Duncan Campbell of Glenorchy, ancestor of the Earls of Breadalbine. The Motto, or rather, perhaps, Slug-Horn, of the Laird of Glenorchy, was, "Follow me." On this marriage, therefore, I am led to believe that Alexander Napier might take the responsive Slug-Horn of "Ready, aye Ready," as if he had said, "always ready to follow you." This may, perhaps, primâ facie, appear too hypothetical; but it is grounded upon the authority of a Friend, a Native of Scotland, who once told me that the Mottoes of the Lairds often had a reference to that of their Chief.

Something like this appears in the Motto of Fraser, late Lord Lovat, which is, "I am Ready." That Family is descended from a younger Branch, the elder having ended in Daughters. They had for their Ancestor, in the Female line, the Sister of King Robert I.; and the Motto seems, if not responsive, at least expressive of Loyalty.

This sort of Motto seems to prevail in the Family of Douglas. That of the elder Branches is, "Forward;" to which the younger Branches reply, "Jamais Arrière," which may, perhaps, be best translated by the vulgar Scottish expression, "Hard at your Back."

The Motto of Hay, Earl of Errol, which is, "Serva Jugum," deserves our particular attention; and is founded on a well-attested historical fact, related to this effect by Mr. Crawfurd. In the Reign of Kenneth III. (anno 980), when the Danes invaded this Island, and gave Battle to the Scots, whom they had routed at the Village of Loncarty, near Perth, a certain Husbandman of the name of Hay, who was tilling his Land, perceived his Countrymen flying before the Enemy; when he and his two Sons, arming themselves with their Plough-gear, the old Man having the Yoke of the Oxen for his own Weapon, upbraided the Scots for their Cowardice, and, after much difficulty, persuaded them to rally. They accordingly, under the Command of this unexpected Leader and his Sons, armed with Yokes and Plough-shares, renewed the Engagement; when the Danes, supposing their Enemy had received a reinforcement, fled in their turn. The King, in reward for this uncommon Service, advanced Hay to the Rank of Noblesse, and gave him as much Land as a Falcon, let loose from the Fists, should compass at one flight. The lucky Bird, says Dr. Abercrombie, seemed sensible of the merits of those that were to enjoy it; for she made a circuit of seven or eight miles long, and four or five broad; the limits of which are still extant. This Tract of Ground, continues my Author, being called Errol, the Family took from thence its designation, or title.

To these circumstances the Armorial Bearings of the Family have very strong allusions; for the Supporters are Two Labourers with each a Yoke on his Shoulder; the Crest is a Falcon; and the Motto "Serva Jugum." The Coat Armour likewise is, Argent, Three Escocheons Gules; or, to speak in the language of noble Blazonry, Pearl, Three Escutcheons Ruby; to intimate that the Father and his Two Sons had been the three fortunate Shields by which Scotland had been defended and saved.

Another Branch of the Family (Hay, Earl of Kinnoul,) gives the same Coat, with a Bordure for difference; the Supporters are likewise Two Husbandmen, the one having a Plough-share, and the other a Pick, or Spade, upon his Shoulder. The Yoke is preserved in the Crest, upon the Shoulder of a Demi-Man, from the waist upwards; and the Motto seems to refer to the rallying of the Scottish Army in these words, "Renovate Animos."

Buchanan, further tells us, with regard to the modesty of these unexpected Conquerors, that, when they were brought to the King, rich and splendid Garments were offered to them, that they might be distinguished in a Triumphal Entry which was to be made into the Town of Perth; but the old Man rejected them with a decent contempt; and, wiping the dust from his ordinary Clothes, joined the Procession, with no other distinction than the Yoke upon his shoulder, preceded and followed by the King's Train. More minute circumstances of this extraordinary Victory, obtained, after a palpable Defeat, at the instigation of one obscure Man, are related by Buchanan, to whom I refer your Lordship; and you will find it equal to any instance we have of Roman Virtue, and the Amor Patriæ, so much boasted of among the Ancients.

Lloyd, in his Worthies, among his observations on the Life of James Hay, Earl of Carlisle, tells us a chimerical story, but on what authority I do not discover; after having mentioned slightly the above fact, that James Hay, 600 years afterwards, "saved the King of that Country from the Gowries at their House with a Cultre (or Plough-share) in his hand;" and that he had as much Land assigned him as he could ride round in two days. It does not appear from the accounts we have of the Gowry conspiracy, that any person of the name of Hay was concerned; but rather that this story has been confounded with the other, because, according to Dr. Abercrombie's account, the Land over which the Falcon flew in the first case, was in a part of Scotland known by the name of Gowry.

Conyngham, Earl of Glencairn, has this very singular Motto, "Over Fork Over," alluding to the principal Charge upon the Shield, which is the rude and ancient Hay-Fork, called in Scotland a Shake-Fork, and is in shape not unlike the Roman letter Y.

This Bearing, some of their Heralds tell us, was official, because, they say, the Family had been Hereditary Masters of the King's Horses and Stables, of which employment this instrument was indicative. Such official Charges and Sur-charges were common in Scotland: thus, Carnegie, Earls of Southesk, charge the Breast of their Blue Eagle with a Cup of Gold, being Hereditary Cup-Bearers to the Kings of Scotland. But this will not hold good as to the Conynghams; though their Sur-charge of a Man on Horseback upon the Shake-Fork may perhaps be such an official Bearing. Different conjectures have been brought forward; and Mr. Camden and some others have interpreted the Fork to have been an Archiepiscopal Pall; for which surmise a very vague reason is given, viz. that an Ancestor of the Family was concerned in the Murder of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury. Which Bearing, Mr. Nisbet observes, would in such case operate rather as an abatement than a badge of honour[305]. This conjecture, however, will not hold good on heraldic principles; for a Pall, when used as a Charge, is very differently represented, the three ends of it being square, and even touching the borders of the Escocheon; whereas the device before us is pointed at the ends, and does not come in contact with the edges of the Shield. But what has the Pall to do with the Motto? We must therefore advert to other circumstances for an interpretation of both the reason of the Armorial Bearing and the Motto, which generally assist to explain each other. The account which comes nearest the point in the present question is given by Mr. Nisbet from Frederick Van Bassen, a Norwegian, who, he says, was a good Genealogist, and left in MS. an account of the rise of some Scottish Families, and among the rest of this of Conyngham; from which MS. Mr. Nisbet gives this account—"that Malcome, the Son of Friskine, assisting Prince Malcom (afterwards surnamed Canmore) to escape from Macbeth's tyranny, and being hotly pursued by the Usurper's Men, was forced at a place to hide his Master by forking Straw or Hay above him. And after, upon that Prince's happy accession to the Crown, he, the King, rewarded his Preserver Malcome with the Thanedom of Cunnigham, from which he and his Posterity have their Surname, and took this Figure to represent the Shake-Fork with which he, Malcome, forked Hay or Straw above the Prince, to perpetuate the happy deliverance their Progenitor had the good fortune to give to their Prince." Admitting this to be a fact, or even a legendary tale, credited by the Family when this Bearing was granted or assumed, there is an affinity between the Device and the Motto not to be found among the other conjectures.

There is another Family where the true Armorial Ensigns are illustrated by the Motto; viz. the Arms of Bailie of Lanington, which have often been blazoned as Nine Mullets or Spurrials (or 3, 3, 2, and 1); whereas it is evident they were Stars from the Motto, which is, "Quid clarius Astris?"

I make no doubt there are many others of a like kind to be found, arising from inattention or ignorance. It has been observed, that the Shake-Fork is now much obscured by an Armed Man on Horseback within an Inescocheon, which is supposed to allude to the Hereditary Office of Master of the Horse; though whether this was the case, or whether that Bearing came by alliance, may be doubtful; for Mr. Crawfurd, in his Peerage, does not give it as a part of the Family Coat of Conyngham in 1716; though the more modern Peerages have it. The shape of the Fork is more discernible in the Arms of Conyngham, Peers of Ireland, where it is not covered by a Sur-charge. The meaning of the name is local, Konyng-Ham; i.e. The King's Village or Habitation; which Etymon has been so long obscured by age, that the Lion Office, on granting Supporters to the Family, have given Two Rabbits, or Conies. The Irish Branch has different Supporters; viz. a Horse and a Buck; though it preserves the Motto.

The Earl of Traquair has for his Motto "Judge noucht;" though there is nothing in his Armorial Bearings to which it can allude. One is therefore to look for some event interesting to the Family to ground it upon, which probably was this: Sir John Stewart, first created Baron, and afterwards Earl, of Traquair, by King Charles I. was Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, anno 1635, and remained a firm friend to the Royal Cause to the last. His adherence to it, however, drew on him the resentment of the opposite party, insomuch that he was, 1641, impeached of High Treason, and found guilty; but the Parliament submitted his punishment to the King, who ordered him a Pardon under the Great Seal, the Preamble to which sets forth the King's high opinion of his abilities and his integrity in the discharge of his duty. Upon this transaction, it seems more than possible that the Earl, alluding to the rash and cruel treatment he had received from the Parliament for his loyalty to the King, might assume the Motto "Judge noucht;" the complement of which, we all know, is, "That ye be not judged."

Johnston, Marquis of Annandale.—The modern Motto is "Nunquam non paratus;" but in the original Motto there is History, which connects with other parts of the Bearing. The Crest is "A winged Spur," and one of the Supporters is "A Horse furnished." The Crest was taken, because the Johnstons were often Wardens of the West Borders, and active in suppressing Thieves and Plunderers, who infested them during the Wars between England and Scotland; whence was derived the original Motto, "Alight Thieves all;" commanding, either by their authority or prowess, those Thieves to surrender. The Horse as a Supporter alludes to the same circumstance, or might be considered as a Bearing of Conquest, from a Horse taken from some famous Marauder[306].

The Johnstons of Westrow, or Westerhall, have a different principal Bearing in their Arms; viz. "A Man's Heart, ensigned with an Imperial Crown proper, in base," being part of the Arms of Douglas, in memory of the apprehension of Douglas Earl of Ormond, when in rebellion against James II.[307]

Hamilton, Duke of Hamilton.—Motto, "Through." This Motto is older than the Nobility of the Family, if my conjecture be true; as it seems to have originated from a circumstance which happened in the Reign of the Scottish King, Robert I. in England, at the Court of our King Edward II. Battles, sieges, &c. had been maintained, with various success, between the two Kings, for a long time. During these animosities Sir Gilbert Hamilton, an Englishman, happening to speak in praise of the intrepidity of Robert I. King of Scots, one of the De Spencers (John, Mr. Crawfurd says,) who was of King Edward's Bed-chamber, drew his falchion, and wounded him. Sir Gilbert, more concerned at the contumely than at the wound, and being prevented at the moment from resenting it; yet when he met his antagonist the next day in the same place, ran him through the body. On this he immediately fled for protection to the King of Scots, who gave him lands and honours for this bold vindication of his valour[308].

The Motto of Murray, now Duke of Athol, is, "Furth, Fortune, and fill the Fetters;" but it was originally given to John Stewart, Earl of Athol, and came to the Family of Murray by an intermarriage with the Heiress of Stewart. The first Earl of Athol of the name of Stewart was constituted Lieutenant to King James III. (1457); and for his defeating, and bringing to submission, Mac-Donald, Lord of the Isles, who had rebelled, he had a special grant of several lands, and the above Motto added to his Arms[309], which seems to mean, Go forth, be successful, and fill the Fetters with the Feet of all other rebellious Subjects; for I understand "Fortune" to be a verb, and chosen probably for the sake of the alliteration. One appendage to the Arms of Murray, probably received from Stewart, has an allusion to the Motto; for the Supporter, on the Sinister side, is a Savage, with his Feet in Fetters.

Seton, Earl of Winton (attainted). The original Motto of Lord Seton was "Invia Virtuti Via nulla;" but another was assumed by the first Earl, alluding to an additional charge which he took, by grant I presume, when he was created into that dignity with great pomp (1601) at Holy-Rood House. To the original Sword and Imperial Crown which he bore in an Inescocheon with a Tressure, was added a Blazing Star of Twelve Points, with this new Motto, "Intaminatis fulget honoribus[310]," expressive of the unshaken Loyalty of the Family, which the last Peer unhappily forgot, and forfeited in the Rebellion 1715.

The Slughorn of the Family is Set on[311], which, by amplification, I apprehend, means Set upon your Enemy, as an incitement to ardour; and is rather analogous to the Motto Think on, of the Lord Kirkcudbright, before-mentioned.

Bruce, Earl of Elgin. This, and other Branches of that ancient and once Kingly Family, has, for its Motto, "Fuimus," alluding strongly to their having been formerly in possession of the Crown of Scotland. The Crest is likewise denotative of Royal pretensions, viz. "A Hand holding a Sceptre." Something, however, is worth observing in several of the subordinate Branches, more distant from the original Stock, where one may discern the gradual dispirited declension of the Family, in point of Regal claims. One private House, indeed, bears the Lion Rampant in the Arms, and likewise the Crest, and the Motto of the Peer. Another descendant drops the Lion in the Arms, and only bears for Crest, "A Hand holding a Sword," with this modest Motto, "Venture forward." A third seems to give up all for lost, by the Crest, viz. "A Setting Sun," with this Motto, "Irrevocable;" while a fourth appears to relinquish a Temporal for the hope of an Eternal Crown, by this Motto, "Spes mea supernè."[312]

Gordon, Duke of Gordon. The primitive Bearing of this Family was, "Azure, a Boar's Head couped, Or;" though at present it carries "Azure, Three Boars Heads couped, Or." The first is the more honourable Charge, as the Unit is always accounted in Heraldry preferable to Numbers, not only on account of its simplicity[313], but in a religious sense (often couched in Armory), as it betokens God the Father, while the Charge of Three has the like reference to the Trinity. The traditional story, however, relating to the particular Coat Armour before us, is told by Douglas, in his Peerage of Scotland, to this effect; viz. that in the Reign of King Malcolm Canmore, in the eleventh century, a valiant Knight, of the name of Gordon, came into Scotland, but from whence is not said, and was kindly received by that Prince. The Knight, not long afterwards, killed a Wild Boar, which greatly infested the Borders[314], when Malcolm gave him a grant of lands in the Shire of Berwick. These lands, according to the custom of those times, the Knight called Gordon, after his own name, and settled upon them, taking a Boar's Head for his Armorial Ensign, in memory of his having killed "that monstrous animal[315]." This may seem a trivial reason in itself, but we have another similar tradition in the Arms of Forbes[316].

In process of time the Gordons, according to the practice in Heraldry, increased the number of Boars Heads to three, two and one; and thus they continue to be borne at this day, with proper differences; one of which, being particular, I shall mention, viz. Gordon, Earl of Aboyne. The reference contained in the Motto of this Branch seems merely to be confined to the Cheveron placed between the Boars Heads, in these words, "Stant cætera Tigno," which last word is the acknowledged Latin word for the Cheveron[317]. This is, perhaps, the greatest compliment ever paid to the Cheveron, which is accounted one of the humblest Charges known, in Heraldic language, by the name of Ordinaries.

Thus much for the Arms of the Duke of Gordon, and for what has been said both of the Arms and Motto of the Earl of Aboyne; but the Motto of the Ducal Branch of the Family is yet unaccounted for, which is "Bydand." This, I make no doubt, is a compound word, and of no little antiquity; and I take the resolution of it to be, by contraction, Byde th' End, with the letter D in the place of the TH; for the Glossarist to some ancient Scottish Poems, published from the MSS. of George Bannatyne, at Edinburgh, 1770, p. 247, renders the word Bidand, pendente Lite. See also the Glossary, ad calcem. As to its import, it may refer to Family transactions, in two points of view; viz. either to loyal or religious attachments. In support of the first, we find that Sir Adam Gordon was a strenuous asserter of the claims of the Bruces, and peculiarly active in the cause of King Robert I. (in that long contest), who accordingly rewarded him with a large grant of land, sufficient to secure his interest, and make him byde the end of the contest as a feudatory under that King. The Son and Grandson of Sir Adam were both faithful to the interest of the Bruces, and had the above grant confirmed by King David II.[318] If this is not satisfactory, we have instances of acts of piety done by the early Branches of this Family, sufficient to warrant the Motto on the interpretation here given; for in the Reign of Malcolm IV. the Family had large possessions, part of which they devoted to religious purposes, by considerable endowments and benefactions given to the Abbey of Kelso[319].

I incline, however, more strongly to the military sense of the Motto; and the more, as it is borne by other Families, manifestly with that reference, though I cannot account for the connexion of the two Houses. Thus, for instance, Leith, in one Branch, has for the Motto, "Semper Fidus;" in another, "Trusty to the End;" and in a third, "Trusty and Bydand;" in this last, I think the contraction of the last word, as above suggested, is more clearly established[320].

In these Mottoes of Leith, it must be confessed there is more appearance of a religious application than in that of the Duke of Gordon, as the Armorial Bearings are partly compounded of Cross-Croslets, and the Crest of the first is likewise a Turtle-dove.

Elphinston, Lord Elphinston; has for his Motto "Caus Causit[321]," or, as written by Mr. Nisbet, "Cause caused it."[322]

In Almon's Short Peerage of Scotland Caus or Cause is interpreted Chance, which leads us to search for some casual circumstance in the history of the Family, whereby it was elevated.

Alexander Elphinston was ennobled by King James IV. in the time of our Henry VIII.; to whom a fatal incident happened, to which his Descendants might have a retrospect when the Motto was assumed. Some branches of the story are controverted; but enough is left by tradition to found our conjecture, and for the Family to rest the choice of their Motto upon. This Alexander, the first Peer, was slain at the Battle of Flodden Field (1513), together with King James IV.; and being, in his person and face, very like the King, his body was carried by the English to Berwick, instead of that of the King, and treated with some indignity. The controvertible part of the circumstance is, that the King escaped by this means, and lived to reward the Family who had thus lost their valiant Chief; but strong proofs are to be found, that the King was actually slain, though by some accounts not in the Battle, as his body was identified by more than one of his confidential Servants, who recognized it by certain private indelible marks[323].

Buchanan allows that the King escaped from the Battle; but adds, that he was killed the same day by a party of his own Subjects, whose interest it was to take him off, to avoid a punishment due to themselves for cowardice in the preceding Battle[324].

Holinshed tells us, that in order to deceive the Enemy, and encourage his own Troops, the King caused several of his Nobles to be armed and apparelled like himself[325]; and this practice, at that time of day, seems not to have been uncommon; for Shakspeare makes Richard say, during the Battle of Bosworth Field,

Let this pass for truth; yet was Lord Elphinston's case the most remarkable, and most deserving of favour to his posterity, on account of the insults offered to his body, under a supposition that it was the body of the King. After the death of James IV. a long Minority ensued, and consequently a Regency; but what reward the Family of Elphinston had, or what weight they bore in the Reign of James V. or in that of Queen Mary, History is not minute enough to inform us; though we find, that the Great Grandson of the first Peer slain at Flodden-Field was of the Privy Council, and High Treasurer to James VI. (anno 1599) before his accession to the Crown of England. This King was too well read not to have known what passed in the Reign of his Great Grandfather respecting the first Lord Elphinston; and I am willing to suppose the Descendants of that Peer were equally informed of the fact above related; and that the Lord Treasurer Elphinston modestly imputed his elevation ultimately to that circumstance, and allusively took the Motto before us.

Lest this surmise should not be satisfactory, I will offer another on a very different ground, arising from the Crest, which is, "A Lady from the middle richly attired, holding a Castle in her Right Hand, and in her Left a Branch of Laurel." This throws the matter open to another conjecture; for the Bearing of the Lady, with the Castle in her Right Hand, may well be supposed to relate to Alliances; several of the Ancestry of the Family, which came originally from Germany in the time of Robert the Bruce (in the Reign of our Edward II.) having married Heiresses[327], whereby they obtained Lands, Castles, Power, and Nobility. These events often repeated, which may be termed the effects of chance, give us latitude to suppose the Motto may, on the other hand, relate to those casual means, whereby the Family rose to the honour of the Peerage.

These are the only two conjectures I have to offer; and I do not at present meet with any other historical matter to warrant a third.

Leslie, Earl of Rothes.—The Motto of this Family is "Grip (or Gripe) Fast[328]," and seems to contain a double allusion; first to the old Motto "Firmâ Spe," and afterwards to some parts of the additional Armorial Appendages. I call it the old Motto, from the account Mr. Nisbet gives of the original Bearing and its adjuncts; viz. "Argent, on a Fess, between two Cross-Croslets Azure, Three Buckles Or." Crest, "A Griphon's (or Griffin's) Head couped Proper, charged with a Cross-Croslet fitched Argent." Motto, "Firmâ Spe."[329] Herein the Cross-Croslets repeated, taken together with the new Motto, admit of a religious allusion, as holding fast the Faith of Christ with firm Hope, expressed allegorically by the Head of the Griffin. It may therefore be conceived, that the change of the Motto might take place after the Family, on being ennobled, chose Griffins for Supporters; thereby giving a loose and whimsical translation, if I may call it so, of "Firmâ Spe," by the words "Grip Fast." The ancient Bearings of the Cross-Croslets are now discharged, nothing remaining on the Field but a Bend, instead of a Fess, charged with Three Buckles; so that the meaning, couched under the Cross-Croslets, the Griffin's Head, and the original words of the Motto, is entirely lost: and at present nothing remains but a quaint allusion to the group of those chimerical Animals. The Buckles, borne first on the Fess, and afterwards on the Bend (a Change not uncommon as a Difference, in token of Cadency or Cadetship in Scotland), may likewise have regard to that strong metaphorical description of Christian Defence against the Powers of Darkness in the Sixth Chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians, or to the First Epistle to the Thessalonians (Chap. v. 21). "Hold fast that which is good;" viz. the Faith and Hope in the Cross of Christ. In support of this idea, as being primarily religious, it appears that one subordinate Branch of the Family (Leslie of Talloch) bears for a Crest, not a Griffin's, but "An Eagle's Neck, with Two Heads erased Sable;" with the Motto "Hold Fast:" and another has for its Motto "Keep Fast:"[330] so that Grip, or Gripe Fast, may be considered as a mere canting Motto, arising from old Heraldic wit. Leslie of Burdsbank, carries the quartered Coat of the Earl of Rothes, with Differences; with the Crest, "A Buckle Or," and the Motto "Keep Fast."

I close this attempt (for I call it nothing more) with a singular Motto of a Private Family.

Haig, or perhaps Haigh, of Bemerside, has for the Family Motto "Tyde what may," founded on a Prophecy of Sir Thomas Lermont (well known in Scotland by the name of "Thomas the Rhymer," because he wrote his Prophecies in Rhyme), who was an Herald in the Reign of Alexander III. He is said to have foretold the time of his own death; and particularly, among other remarkable occurrences, the Union of England and Scotland, which was not accomplished till the Reign of James VI. some hundreds of years after this Gentleman died. These Prophecies were never published in a perfect state; but the Epitome of them is well known in Scotland, though Mr. Nisbet says it is very erroneous. The original, he tells us, is a Folio MS. which Mr. Nisbet seems to have seen; for he adds, "Many things are missing in the small book which are to be met with in the original, particularly these two lines, concerning his (Sir Thomas Lermont's) neighbour, Haig of Bemerside:

"And," continues Mr. Nisbet, "his Prophecy concerning that ancient Family has hitherto been true; for since that time till this day (1702) the Haigs have been Lairds of that place."[331]

"Cave Adsum" is the Motto of Jardin, of Applegirth, Bart. in Scotland. The Ingredients (as they may be called) to which it alludes, are very dispersed, and to be collected from the Supporters, the Bearing, and Crest: the Arms having "Three Mullets charged on the Chief;" the Supporters, "An Armed Man and a Horse;" and the Crest, "A Mullet or Spur-Rowel." This might allude to Justs and Tournaments[332].

I shall conclude with one Irish Motto; that of Fitzgerald—"Crom a Boo;" a Cri de Guerre, or Term of Defiance. A Boo means the Cause, or the Party, and Crom was the ancient Castle of the Fitz-Geralds. So Butler a Boo meant the Ormond Party, the Cri on the other side; by which they insulted each other, and consequently frays and skirmishes ensued[333].

Simon Fitz-Alan had a Son Robert, who, being of a fair complexion, was called Boyt, or Boyd, from the Celtic or Gallic word Boidh, which signifies fair or yellow[334], from which he assumed his Sur-name, and from him all the Boyds in Scotland are descended[335].

Canmore is a Sobriquet. So might GoldBerry, from the colour of Boyd's hair. Sobriquets common in England and France; there was scarce a French King without some addition, relative to their persons, or to their good or bad qualities.

Goldberry is a Slughorn, for the Motto is Confido, as applying to the confidence the Chief had in the Vassals belonging to the Clan; though by the modern Crest (a Thumb and two Fingers pointing to Heaven) it seems to admit of a religious interpretation.

Every thing has History belonging to it, though perhaps it is seldom worth investigation; and what follows will, I suspect, be thought not unlike Gratiano's reasons; viz. "As two grains of wheat hid in two bushels of chaff; you shall seek all day ere you find them, and when you have them, they are not worth the search[336]." But, as the History of Coaches in general, and particularly of Hackney Coaches, has never been drawn together, I shall attempt to do it as an historical detail of that species of luxury. . The Nobleman, and the man of fortune, steps into his own carriage; and the humbler orders of men into their occasional coach, even with the gout upon them, when walking is out of the question; without ever thinking with the smallest gratitude of those who introduced or improved such a convenience; and all this because these Vehicles are now too common to attract our notice further than their immediate use suggests.

It is the business of Antiquaries to rescue subjects of this sort from oblivion, as to their origin, their improvements, &c. to the present hour; who of course must leave it to others of the same class, to shew their decline; for it is not improbable that even the present gay families, or their posterity, may be witnesses of such a revolution.

The first Wheel-Carriages of the Coach kind were in use with us in the Reign of King Richard II., and were called Whirlicotes; though we cannot but suppose they were such as, but for the name of riding, our ancestors might as well have walked on foot. Let us hear the account given either by Master John Stowe, or some of his Editors, on this matter, who tells us that "Coaches were not known in this Island; but Chariots, or Whirlicotes, then so called, and they only used of Princes, or men of great estates, such as had their footmen about them. And for example to note, I read[337] that Richard II. being threatened by the Rebels of Kent, rode from the Tower of London to the Miles-End, and with him his Mother, because she was sick and weak, in a Whirlicote.... But in the year next following, the said Richard took to wife Anne, daughter to the King of Bohemia, who first brought hither the riding upon side-saddles; and so was the riding in those Whirlicotes and Chariots forsaken, except at Coronations, and such like spectacles. But now of late," continues he, "the use of Coaches brought out of Germany, is taken up and made so common, as there is neither distinction of time, nor difference of persons, observed; for the world runs on wheels with many whose parents were glad to go on foot[338]."

We may hence suppose that the Whirlicote was not much more than a Litter upon Wheels, and adapted both to state and invalidity, among the higher orders of mankind; for we have seen that they gave place even to riding on Horseback, among the Ladies, as soon as proper Saddles were introduced.

The word Coach is evidently French, from their word Carrosse, and was formerly often written Carroche, as it appears in Stowe's Chronicle, where the two words appear almost in the same sentence. The French word, nevertheless, is not radically such, but formed from the Italian Carroccio, or Carrozza, for they have both; and that even the latter is a compound of Carro Rozzo, it being a red Carriage, whereon the Italians carried the Cross when they took the field. So says Mr. Menage[339]; and if so, this Vehicle passed from Italy to Germany, from thence to France, and at length to us. According to Mr. De Caseneuve, the Italian Carrocio had four wheels; and he adds to what Mr. Menage has said, that they carried their Standards upon it[340].

The French Charrette, from whence our Chariot[341], had but two wheels. But we may observe how our word is degraded, for it properly signifies a Cart, though it had four wheels[342]. The French, since Coaches came into use, have been ashamed of the term, and call it a Carrosse Coupé, or Half-Coach. . By the above account the Chariot seems to have been the elder Vehicle, or rather the Coach in its infancy; which will lead us towards the etymon of our word Coach, and to the original nature of our Chariot, though both of them have the same common parent.

We may, however, collect enough from these accounts, to satisfy ourselves that the introduction of Coaches took place in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth; and Stowe's Continuator adds a very natural consequence:—That, after the Royal example, "divers great ladies made them Coaches, and rode in them up and down the countries, to the great admiration of all the beholders." After this, he tells us, they grew common among the Nobility and opulent Gentry; that within twenty years Coach-making became a great trade, and that Coaches grew into more general use soon after the accession of King James.

What sort of Carriages they originally were with us, in point of elegance, is not easily said; but in Germany, about that period, we are told they were—"ugly Vehicles made of four boards, which were put together in a very clumsy manner[343]." Of these, however, my Author adds, that John Sigismund, Elector of Brandenburg, when he went to Warsaw to do homage for the Dutchy of Prussia, A. D. 1618, had in his train thirty-six of these Coaches, each drawn by six horses.

Either the Chariots of that time were usually more elegant, or the Denmarkers had more taste than the Germans; for the same Author tells us, that, when the King of Denmark passed through Berlin, in the Reign of the Elector John George, who died 1598, the King made his entry "in a black-velvet Chariot, laced with gold; drawn by eight white coursers, with bits and caparisons all of silver[344]."

The Chariot I take to have been a much more ancient Vehicle, and an open Vehicle; for we read of them in the Reign of our Henry VII. and even of our Richard II.

Queen Elizabeth, when she went to St. Paul's, 1588, after the Spanish Armada, was in a Chariot supported by four pillars, and drawn by two white horses[345].

It is generally agreed, by those Writers who have touched upon the subject, that Coaches were introduced into this Kingdom in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth; but they must have had an earlier appearance amongst us than Anderson, in his History of Commerce, vol. I. p. 421, allows, who affirms, that the first of them was brought hither by [Henry] Fitz-Alan, the last Earl of Arundel of that name, in the year 1580; which cannot be the truth; for his Lordship died 1579. This Earl, after having served Kings Henry VIII. and Edward VI. and Queen Mary, became likewise high in the favour of Queen Elizabeth, and was Lord Steward of her Household; but, finding himself supplanted by the Earl of Leicester, he went abroad A. D. 1566[346]. It is to be supposed that he travelled to the sea-coast in the accustomed manner on Horseback; but he is said to have returned in his Coach, which, Mr. Granger says, was the first Equipage of the kind ever seen in England[347]; but that Author has left us without the date; so that we are yet to seek for that point.

Another Writer robs his Lordship entirely of the honour of such introduction; for Stowe's Continuator expressly says, that "In the year 1564 (two years before the Earl of Arundel went abroad), Guilliam Boonen, a Dutchman, became the Queen's Coachman, and was the first that brought the use of Coaches into England[348]." This very Coachman is said also to have driven the Queen's Coach, when she visited Oxford, 1592. Which of these two stories be true, the Relaters, Granger and Stowe, must answer for: but Anderson is palpably wrong in his date.

I can form no better an idea of our first Coaches than that they were heavy and unwieldy, as they continued to be for nearly two centuries afterwards; and I can at best but take the standard from the present State Coaches of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Speaker of the House of Commons[349].

It cannot be any matter of surprize, after so luxurious a conveyance had found its way into the Royal Establishment, that it should be adopted by others who could support the expence, when not curbed by sumptuary laws; and we have accordingly seen, that Coaches prevailed much, early in the Reign of King James; but Hackney Coaches, which are professedly the Subject of this Memoir, waited till luxury had made larger strides among us, and till private Coaches came to market at second hand.

There having always been an imitative luxury in mankind, whereby the inferior orders might approximate the superior; so those that could not maintain a Coach de die in diem contrived a means of having the use of one de horâ in horam. Hence arose our occasional Vehicles called Hackney Coaches.

The French word Haquenée[350] implies a common horse for all purposes of riding, whether for private use or for hire; generally an ambler, as distinguished from the horses of superior orders, such as the palfrey and the great horse. The former of these are often called pad-nags, and were likewise amblers; while horses for draught were called trotting-horses[351]: so that the Haquenée was in fact, and in his use, distinct from all the rest, and inferior in rank and quality. This term for an ambling-nag occurs in Chaucer[352]. Thus we obtained our Haquenée or Hackney Horses long before we had any Coaches to tack to them; and the term had likewise, at the same time, made its way into metaphor, to express any thing much and promiscuously used. Thus Shakspeare, who never lived to ride in a Hackney Coach, applies the word Hackney to a common woman of easy access[353]: and again, in the First Part of Henry IV. (Act iii. Sc. 4), the King says to the Prince of Wales,

Now Shakspeare died in the year 1616; whereas Hackney Coaches were not known, in the Streets at least, till about the year 1625[354].

Though the term Haquenée is French, it is not used in France for Coaches of a like kind; yet, after we had adopted the word as applied to horses of the common sort, it was easy to put them in harness, for the service of drawing, and the convenience of the Inhabitants of the Metropolis; whereby the word Hackney became transferred to the whole Equipage, then in want of a differential name; whereof the Coach, being the more striking part, obtained the name by pre-eminence.

Before I return to my subject, give me leave to add a word or two on the French Coaches of a similar nature, which are called Fiacres[355]. The term is thus accounted for, though I did not suspect I should have found the meaning in a Martyrology. Fiacre was the name of a Saint, whose Portrait, like those of many other famous men of their times both in Church and State, had the honour to adorn a Sign-Post; and the Inn in Paris, Rue St. Antoine, from which these Coaches were first let out to hire on temporary occasions, had the Sign of St. Fiacre, and from thence they took their name. M. Richelet, in his Dictionary[356], tells us, that a Fiacre is "Carosse de loüage, auquel on a donné ce nom à cause de l'Enseigne d'un logis de la Rue St. Antoine de Paris ou l'on a premierement löué ces sortes de Carosse. Ce logis avoit pour Enseigne un Saint Fiacre." As to the Saint himself, he was no less a personage than the second Son, and at length Heir, of Eugenius IV. King of Scots, who lived in the Seventh Century. He went into France, took a religious habit, refusing the Crown of Scotland some years afterwards, on his Brother's death; and, when he died, was canonized. There is a Chapel dedicated to him at St. Omer's. His death is commemorated on the 30th of August[357].

As to the time when the French Fiacres first came into use, we are led pretty nearly to it by Mr. Menage, who, in his "Origines de la Langue Françoise," published in Quarto, 1650, speaks of them as of a late introduction. His words are, "On appelle ainsi [Fiacre] à Paris depuis quelques années un Carosse de loüage." He then gives the same reason as we find in Richelet: but the words "depuis quelques Années" shew, that those Coaches had not then been long in use, and are to be dated either a little before or a little after our own; insomuch that it is probable the one gave the example to the other, allowing Mr. Menage credit for twenty-five years, comprehended in his expression of quelques Années[358].

But to return to our Hackney Coaches, which took birth A. D. 1625 (the first year of King Charles I.); and either began to ply in the Streets, or stood ready at Inns to be called for if wanted: and at that time did not exceed twenty in number[359]. But, as luxury makes large shoots in any branch where it puts forth, so we find that, in no more than ten years, this new-planted scyon had grown so much as to require the pruning-knife; for that the Street Coaches had become in reality a national nuisance in various particulars: and accordingly a Proclamation issued A.D. 1635 in the following words:

"That the great numbers of Hackney Coaches of late time seen and kept in London, Westminster, and their Suburbs, and the general and promiscuous use of Coaches there, were not only a great disturbance to his Majesty, his dearest Consort the Queen, the Nobility, and others of place and degree, in their passage through the Streets; but the Streets themselves were so pestered, and the pavements so broken up, that the common passage is thereby hindered and made dangerous; and the prices of hay and provender, and other provisions of stable, thereby made exceeding dear: Wherefore we expressly command and forbid, That, from the Feast of St. John the Baptist next coming, no Hackney or Hired Coaches be used or suffered in London, Westminster, or the Suburbs or Liberties thereof, except they be to travel at least three miles out of London or Westminster, or the Suburbs thereof. And also, that no person shall go in a Coach in the said Streets, except the owner of the Coach shall constantly keep up Four able Horses for our Service, when required[360]. Dated January 19, 1635-6."

This Proclamation, so long as it was observed, must have put a considerable check to the use of these Carriages; nor can I think it could operate much in the King's favour, as it would hardly be worth a Coach-Master's while to be at so great a contingent charge as the keeping of Four Horses to be furnished at a moment's warning for his Majesty's occasional employment. We are to construe this, then, as amounting to a prohibition, on account of the certain expence which must follow an uncertain occupation. The nature of this penalty, as I may call it, was founded on the Statute of Purveyance, not then repealed.

But there was another co-operating cause that suspended the use of Coaches for a short time, which was the introduction of the Hackney Chairs, which took place a very little while before the Proclamation. They arose from the incommodities stated in the Royal Edict, and, no doubt, tended in some measure towards the suppression of the Hackney-Coaches; till by degrees being found incompetent to answer all their seemingly intended purposes, we shall see the Coaches, in about two years time, return into the streets, and resume their functions. But to proceed with the History of the Chairs. At the critical time, then, when Government was devising measures to prevent the increase of Coaches as much as possible, for the reasons alleged in the Proclamation, there stepped in a Knight, by name Sir Saunders Duncombe, a Gentleman-Pensioner, and a travelled man, who proposed the introduction of Chairs, after the model he had seen abroad[361]. This was in the year 1634; when Sir Saunders obtained an exclusive Patent for the setting them forth for hire, dated the first day of October, for the term of fourteen years. The number is not specified, but left perhaps indefinite, it being impossible to say what would be necessary in a new device of this sort, tending to be beneficial to the introductor, as well as convenient to the Publick. The tenor of the Grant, omitting the words of course, runs thus:

"Charles, &c.

"Whereas the several Streets and Passages within our Cities of London and Westminster, and the Suburbs of the same, are of late time so much encumbered and pestered with the unnecessary multitude of Coaches therein used, that many of our good and loving Subjects are by that means oftentimes exposed to great danger; and the necessary use of Carts and Carriages for the necessary Provisions of the said Cities and Suburbs thereby also much hindered. And whereas, our servant, Sir Sanders Duncombe, Knight, hath lately preferred his humble Petition unto us; thereby shewing, that in many parts beyond the Seas, the people there are much carried in the Streets in Chairs that are covered; by which means very few Coaches are used amongst them: and thereof he hath humbly besought us to grant unto him the sole using and putting forth to hire of certain covered Chairs, which he will procure to be made at his own proper costs and charges, for carrying such of our loving Subjects as shall desire to use the same, in and about our said Cities of London and Westminster, and the Suburbs thereof.

"Know ye, that we, of our princely care of the good and welfare of all our loving Subjects, desiring to use all good and lawful ways and means that may tend to the suppressing of the excessive and unnecessary number of Coaches now of late used in and about our said Cities, and the Suburbs thereof; and to the intent the said Sir Sanders Duncombe may reap some fruit and benefit of his industry, and may recompense himself of the costs, charges, and expences, which he shall be at in and about the directing, making, procuring, and putting in use of the said covered Chairs, of the purpose aforesaid; and for divers other good causes and considerations, us hereunto moving, of our special grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, have given and granted, and by these Presents, for Us, our Heirs and Successors, do give and grant, unto the said Sir Sanders Duncombe, his Executors, Administrators, and Assigns, and to his and their, and every of their, Deputy and Deputies, Servants, Workmen, Factors, and Agents, and to all and every such person and persons as shall have power and authority from him, them, or any of them, in that behalf, full and free Licence, Privilege, Power, and Authority, that they only, and none other, shall or may, from time to time, during the term of fourteen years hereafter granted, use, put forth, and lett to hire, within our said Cities of London and Westminster, and the Suburbs and Precincts thereof, or in any part of them, or any of them, the said covered Chairs, to be carried and borne as aforesaid.

"Witness Ourself at Canbury, the First day of October[362]."

The place principally hinted at in the above Grant, or Patent, seems to have been the City of Sedan in Champagne; where, we are at liberty to suppose, these covered Chairs being most in use, they obtained with us the name of Sedan Chairs, like the local names of Berlin and Landau[363].

These new Vehicles, hitherto unseen in our orbit, had, doubtless, patrons among the beaus and fine gentlemen of the age; though, in their general utility, they manifestly could not be so commodious as Coaches, were it for no other reason than that they could carry but one person. They might prevail with persons of a certain rank and description; but the opulent Merchant, and others in a similar line of family life, still were in want of a conveyance of greater capacity; a circumstance which would depress the Chairs, and gradually hasten the re-introduction of the Coaches, and which, as has been observed, took place accordingly in little more than two years. The following special commission was therefore granted by the King, A. D. 1637, wherein the number of the Coaches seems rather to have enlarged, and the management of them was placed in the department of the Master of the Horse. It runs essentially in the following words:

"That we, finding it very requisite for our Nobility and Gentry, as well as for Foreign Ambassadors, Strangers, and others, that there should be a competent number of Hackney Coaches allowed for such uses, have, by the advice of our Privy Council, thought fit to allow Fifty Hackney Coachmen in and about London and Westminster; limiting them not to keep above Twelve Horses a-piece. We therefore grant to you [the Marquis] during your Life, the Power and Authority to license Fifty Hackney Coachmen, who shall keep no more than Twelve good Horses each, for their, or any of their, Coach and Coaches respectively. You also hereby have Power to license so many in other Cities and Towns of England as in your wisdom shall be thought necessary; with power to restrain and prohibit all others from keeping any Hackney Coach to let to hire, either in London or elsewhere. Also to prescribe Rules and Orders concerning the daily Prices of the said licensed Hackney Coachmen, to be by them, or any of them, taken for our own particular service, and in their employment for our Subjects; provided such orders be first allowed by us, under our Royal Hand."[364]

We may observe that the article of Purveyance is here very gently touched upon, and confined to a sign-manual. Mr. Anderson supposes that there must have been many more than fifty Coaches introduced by the above allowance of twelve horses; but it seems rather to imply that no Coach-Master should engross more than six Coaches to himself. This also might be a tacit mode of preserving a supply of horses to be purveyed for the King when necessary.

One may collect from hence that private Coaches were sparingly kept, by the mention of the Nobility and Gentry.

Hitherto we have found the Hackney Coaches under the regulation of the Crown, or its immediate Officers; but we are now to look for them at a time when the Monarchical Government was suspended, during the Protectorate. Whether the Master of the Horse received any emolument from granting the above Licences, is not apparent; but under the Commonwealth we find that the Coaches became subject to a tax towards the expence of their regulation; for by an Act of Oliver's Parliament, A. D. 1654, the number of such Coaches, within London and Westminster, was enlarged to two hundred[365]. The outlying distance was also augmented to six miles round the late lines of communication, as the Statute expresses it; by which I conceive that the greatest distance was extended to nine miles, including the three prescribed, or rather enjoined, by the regulating proclamation of King Charles I. in the year 1635. By this Act of Oliver's Parliament, the government of the Hackney Coaches, with respect to their stands, rates, &c. was placed in the Court of Aldermen of London; and as, of course, this new business would require Clerks, and other officers, to supervise it, the Coach-Masters were made subject to the payment of twenty shillings yearly for every such Coach.

Here we have brought the Coaches under a Police similar to that of our own time; but it did not long remain in the hands of the Corporation; for in the year after the Restoration, the establishment was new-modelled by an Act of the 13th and 14th of King Charles II. 1661, wherein it is specified that no Coaches were to be used without a Licence,—who may be entitled to such Licences,—that the number shall not exceed 400,—what shall be the rates,—with penalties for exacting more[366].

Each of these four hundred Coaches so licensed was obliged to pay annually five pounds for the privilege, to be applied towards the keeping in repair certain parts of the streets of London and Westminster[367]; a very rational appropriation of such fund, for who ought so much to contribute to the amendment of the streets, as those who lived by their demolition?

"Nex Lex æquior ulla, quam," &c.

Within a few years after the Revolution (anno 5 Gul. et Mar. ch. xxii.) the number of Coaches arose to seven hundred, each of which paid to the Crown annually four pounds. This, primâ facie, one would suppose was a relief to the Coach-Masters, and that the reduction in the impost accrued from the number; but that was not the case, for every Owner, for each Coach, was constrained to pay down fifty pounds for his first Licence for twenty-one years, or forego his employment; which seeming indulgence was, in fact, paying five pounds per annum for that term; whereas, probably, the Coach-Master would rather have continued at the former five pounds, and have run all risks, than have purchased an exclusive privilege, in the gross, at so high a price.

The finances, and even the resources, of Government, must have been very low at this moment, or Ministry could never have stooped to so paltry and oppressive an expedient, to raise so small a sum as would arise from these Licences. By the increase of the number of Coaches from four hundred at five pounds per annum, to seven hundred at four pounds per annum, the gain to the Treasury was £.800 annually:—and what did the licences at fifty pounds each Coach, for the term of twenty-one years, yield to the State?—£.3,500! Whereas, had such lease of the privilege of driving a Coach been kept at the rack rent of five pounds per annum, it had produced in that period £.14,700.

Thus, however the matter rested, till the ninth year of Queen Anne, 1710, when a Statute was made, which brought the business to its present standard, with a few variations, which will be observed in the order of time. By this Act every circumstance was new modelled; for thereby the Crown was impowered to appoint five Commissioners for regulating and licensing both Hackney Coaches and Chairs, from the time the late Statute of the fifth of William and Mary should expire, viz. at Midsummer A. D. 1715, authorizing such Commissioners to grant licences to eight hundred Hackney Coaches from that time for the term of thirty-two years, which should be allowed to be driven in the Cities of London and Westminster, and the Suburbs thereof, or any where within the Bills of Mortality; each Coach paying for such privilege the sum of five shillings per week[368]. It was at the same time enacted, that from the 24th of June, 1711, all horses to be used with an Hackney Coach shall be fourteen hands high, according to the standard; and further, that every Coach and Chair shall have a mark of distinction, "by figure or otherwise," as the Commissioners shall think fit; and "the said mark shall be placed on each side of every such Coach and Chair respectively, in the most convenient place to be taken notice of, to the end that they may be known if any complaints shall be made of them[369]."

This was all that could then be done respecting the Coaches, forasmuch as the old term of twenty-one years, granted in the fifth year of William and Mary, 1694, was subsisting, whereby seven hundred Coaches were allowed, and for which privilege the Owners had paid fifty pounds each, on whom Government shewed some tenderness. With regard, however, to regulation, &c. there was, no doubt, room sufficient for the exercise of the powers given to the Commissioners. There was, likewise, another object involved in this Statute; viz. the Chairs, which were not comprehended in the same agreement and contract with the Coaches, but were open immediately to new laws. Therefore under the same commissions was placed the management and licensing of the Hackney Chairs, to commence from the 24th of June in the following year, 1711, for the said term of thirty-two years; which were thereby limited to the number of two hundred, each paying for such licence the annual sum of ten shillings[370]. As the number of both Coaches and Chairs was enlarged, whereby many new persons would come forward, perhaps to the ousting of the old Coach-Masters and Chair-Masters, it is required by this Act that the Commissioners shall give a preference to such of the Lessees, as I may call them, whose terms had not then expired, whether the right remained in themselves or their widows, if they applied within a given time[371].

By this statute likewise the rates were limited to time and distance, at ten shillings by the Day.—One shilling and six pence for the first Hour, and one shilling for every succeeding Hour.—One shilling for the distance of a mile and a half.—One shilling and six pence for any distance more than a mile and a half, and not exceeding two miles; and so on, in the proportion of six pence for every succeeding half mile.

The Chairs are likewise at the same time rated at two-thirds of the distance prescribed to the Coaches, so that they were allowed to take one shilling for a mile, and six pence for every succeeding half mile.

Though the time of waiting is not specified in the Act with regard to the Chairs, yet it follows, by implication, to be intended the same as the Coaches. These have been altered by a very late Statute, 1785. It is well known that it is left in the option of either Coachmen or Chairmen, whether they will be paid by the distance or the time, which is but a reasonable privilege; but there is another circumstance, not generally known, of which the passengers are not perhaps aware, viz. that if the room which a Coach will occupy in turning about should exceed the distance allowed, the Coachman is entitled to a larger fare, that is, as much as if he had gone another half mile. The doctrine is the same respecting Chairs, and the room allowed is eight yards in the case of a Coach, and four yards in the case of a Chair. As the Statute gives all competent allowances to the Coachmen and Chairmen, so it was requisite, on the other hand, to make the contract obligatory, and that each of them should be compellable to perform their parts; and therefore, to do this, and at the same time to prevent extortion, it became necessary to add a severe penal clause, viz. "that if any Hackney-Coachman or Chairman shall refuse to go at, or shall exact more for his hire than, the several rates hereby limited, he shall, for every such offence, forfeit the sum of forty shillings." These penalties were, by this Act, to have gone in the proportion of two-thirds to the Queen, and one-third to the Plaintiff. [Since made half to the Crown and half to the Complainant.] The Coachmen and Chairmen are thereby likewise liable to be deprived of their Licences for misbehaviour, or by giving abusive language[372]. On the other hand, that the Coachmen and Chairmen might have a remedy in case of refusal to pay them their just fare, any Justice of the Peace is impowered, upon complaint, to issue a warrant to bring before him the Recusant, and to award reasonable satisfaction to the party aggrieved, or otherwise to bind him over to the next Quarter-Session, where the Bench is empowered to levy the said satisfaction by distress. The Act proceeds to other matters touching the Commissioners themselves, &c.; and then states, that whereas by a Statute of the 29th of Charles II. the use of all Hackney Coaches and Chairs had been prohibited on Sundays, it gives full power both to stand and to ply as on other days.[373]

This is the substance of the Act before us; but it may here be observed, that in the 10th year of the Queen, 1711, one hundred more Chairs were added by Statute, subject to the same regulations as the rest, being found not only convenient but necessary; as the number of Coaches, consistently with Public Faith, could not be enlarged till the year 1715, when the old term of twenty-one years should have expired.

Before all the provisions in the Act of the year 1710, referred to the future period of 1715, could take place, a demise of the Crown intervened, A. D. 1714, by which all such clauses, which extended to a future time, were of course become a nullity.

By Act 12 George I. chap. 12, the number of Chairs was raised to 400, on account of the increase of Buildings Westward.[374]

*       *       *       *       *       *       *       *

To shew how trifling, though necessary conveniences, arise to great and expensive luxuries, let us remark the original insignificant appendage of what we call the Hammer Cloth. It was requisite that the Coachman should have a few implements in case of accidents, or a sudden and little repair was wanting to the Coach; for which purpose he carried a hammer with a few pins, nails, &c. with him, and placed them under his seat, made hollow to hold them, and which from thence was called the Coach Box; and, in a little time, in order to conceal this unsightly appearance, a cloth was thrown over the box and its contents, of which a hammer was the chief, and thence took the name of the Hammer-Cloth. This is my idea of the etymon of these two common terms. And here again it can but be observed that this little appendage is now become the most striking and conspicuous ornament of the equipage.

About the year 790, Charlemagne granted an unlimited right of hunting to the Abbot and Monks of Sithin, for making their Gloves and Girdles of the Skins of the Deer they killed, and Covers for their Books. [Mabillon de Re Diplom. p. 611. Grose.]

Anciently richly adorned and decorated with precious Stones,—as in the Rolls of Parliament, anno 53 Hen. III. A. D. 1267. "Et de 2 Paribus Chirothecarum cum lapidibus." [Warton's History of Poetry, vol. I. p. 182, note. Grose.]

Edward Vere, Earl of Oxford, according to Mr. Walpole's account, on the authority of Stowe,—"having travelled into Italy, is recorded to have been the first that brought into England embroidered Gloves and Perfumes; and presenting the Queen [Elizabeth] with a Pair of the former, she was so pleased with them, as to be drawn with them in one of her Portraits." [Royal and Noble Authors, vol. i. p. 159. Note to Winter's Tale, edit. Johnson and Steevens, 1778, p. 388.]

"Give Gloves to the Reapers, a Largesse to cry."

[Tusser, v. Hist. of Hawsted. 190.]

The Monastery of Bury allowed its Servants two pence apiece for Glove-Silver in Autumn. [Hist. of Hawsted. 190.]

The rural Bridegroom, in Laneham's (or Langham's) Account of the Entertainment of Queen Elizabeth at Kenelworth Castle, 1575, had—a Payr of Harvest Gloves on his Hands, as a sign of good Husbandry. Id. in eod.

When Sir Thomas Pope, the Founder of Trinity College, Oxford, visited it, 1556, "The Bursars offered him a present of embroidered Gloves." [Warton's Life of Sir Thomas Pope, p. 119.]

When Sir Thomas Pope had founded the College, the University complimented him with a Letter of Thanks, which was accompanied with a Present of rich Gloves, 1556. [Warton's Life, p. 132, note.] The Gloves were sent both to himself and Lady, and cost 6s. 8d. [Id. in eod.]

After the death of Sir Thomas Pope, his Widow married Sir Hugh Powlett; on which occasion the College presented her, as the Wife of the Founder, with a Pair of very rich Gloves, the charge for which runs—Pro Pari Chirothecarum dat. Dom. Powlett et Domine Fundatrici, xvi s. Idem, p. 185. See also p. 191, ubi sæpe; and p. 411. "Pro Chirothecis Magistri Pope, xxxii s.

An article charged in the Bursar's books of Trinity College, Oxford, is "pro fumigatis Chirothecis." [Warton.] These were often given to College-Tenants, and Guests of Distinction; but this fell into disuse soon after the Reign of Charles I. Idem. [Grose.]

George Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, received a Glove from Queen Elizabeth. The Queen had dropped it, when he taking it up to return to her, she presented it to him as a mark of her esteem. He adorned it with Jewels, and wore it in the front of his Hat on days of Tournaments. It is expressed in a print of him by Robert White. [Bray's Tour, p. 319.]

See for Gloves worn in Hats, Old Plays, vol. ii. p. 132, second edition: King Lear, act iii. sc. 4. edit, 1778 by Johnson and Steevens.

N. B. Such Tokens as these were called Favours[375], from whence we derive the term for Ribbons given on Weddings. I presume they are supposed to be given by the hand of the Bride.

Dr. Glisson, in his last visit to Queen Elizabeth, received from her a Pair of rich Spanish leather Gloves, embossed on the backs and tops with gold embroidery, and fringed round with gold plate. The Queen, as he tells us, pulled them from her own Royal Hands, saying, "Here, Glisson, wear them for my sake." Life of Corinna (or Mrs. Eliz. Thomas), p. xxxi.

Perfumed Gloves[376]; v. supra.

"These Gloves the Count sent me; they are an excellent Perfume."

Much Ado about Nothing, act ii. sc. 4.

Gloves given at Weddings. Old Plays, vol. v. p. 8.

A Glove hung up in a Church, as a public Challenge. Gilpin's Life of Bernard Gilpin, by Mr. Gilpin, p. 179.

Swearing by Gloves, in jocular conversation, very common. "Aye, by these Gloves!" is an expression I have somewhere seen.

Ladies' Sleeves, as well as Gloves, were worn as tokens of Gallantry. Vide Troil. and Cress, act. v. sc. 2. edit. Johnson and Steevens, 1778.

Gifts that admitted of it (especially to Women from Men) were usually worn on the Sleeve.

"I knew her by this Jewel on her Sleeve."

Love's Labour Lost, act v. sc. 1.

Fairings, and such Tokens, were of this sort. Hence the Question and Answer.

Q. What have you brought me? (from the Fair, &c.)
A. A new nothing, to pin on your Sleeve.

Hence also to pin one's Faith upon another's Sleeve.

"Wear my Heart upon my Sleeve."

Othello, act i. sc. 1.

F. Grose, Esq. to S. Pegge, F. S. A.

September 4, 1784.

Dear Sir,

I have had such a variety of interruptions (agreeable ones), that I have made no hand of your Gloves: all that has occurred on that subject, I here send you.

Blood, who attempted to steal the Crown, presented Mr. Edwards, Keeper of the Jewel Office, with four Pair of White Gloves, as from his Wife, in gratitude for his civility to her in a pretended qualm or sickness. The whole transaction is in Maitland's History of London.

To give one's Glove was considered as a challenge. See Shakspeare, in Hen. V. It is still considered in that light by the Highlanders, of which I once saw an instance in Flanders. Dropping the Gauntlet, at the Coronation, is a kind of challenge.

When the Judge invites the Justices to dine with him at a County Assize, a Glove is handed about by the Crier or Clerk of the Court, who delivers the invitation; into this Glove every one invited puts a shilling.

A Bribe is called a Pair of Gloves.

In a Play, I think called the Twin Rivals, an Alderman presents his Glove, filled with Broad Pieces, to a Nobleman, as a Bribe to procure a Commission for his Son.

Item, for three dozen Leder Gloves, 12s. Vide Account of Henry VII. in Remembrancer's Office.

I set off next week for Christchurch, where I propose staying a month, or six weeks at farthest. My best wishes attend you and yours.

Adieu!

F. Grose.

What we call Ermine is an erroneous conception, for we give the name to White Fur tufted with Black, whereas it is the Black only that is properly Ermine, of which numberless instances may be produced, and this is one.

Powderings on her Bonnet.—This may require an explanation to those who are unacquainted with the language of that age. What we call Ermine, is a compound, which will bear a little analysis, for it is formed of the Fur of one animal, and the tip of the Tail of another. The White Ground is, properly speaking, Minever, so called from a Russian animal of that name. [v. Philips's Dictionary, in voce.] The Ermine is the Armenian Mouse, the tip of whose Tail is Black, which being placed as a falling tuft upon the Minever, forms what we collectively call Ermine, the value of which is enhanced the more, as one animal can afford but one tuft. [v. Bailey's Dict, in voce.] Every one of these tufts is termed a Powdering.

The Heralds make a distinction between the singular Ermine, and the Plural, Ermines; the latter, in their language, importing Black powdered with White: and they go into still more minute modifications, Erminois, &c.

First, none shall wear an Ermine, or Lettice-Bonnet, unless she be a Gentlewoman born, having Arms.

Item, a Gentleman's Wife, she being a Gentlewoman born, shall wear an Ermine or Lettice Bonnet, having one Powdering in the Top. And if she be of honourable stock, to have two Powderings, one before another, in the Top.

Item, an Esquire's Wife to have two Powderings.

Item, an Esquire's Wife for the Body to wear five Powderings; and if she be of great Blood, two before, which maketh seven.

Item, a Knight's Wife to wear on her Bonnet, seven Powderings, or eight at the most, because of higher Blood, as before.

Item, a Banneret's Wife to wear ten Powderings.

Item, a Baron's Wife thirteen.

Item, a Viscount's [Wife] to wear eighteen.

Item, a Countess to wear twenty-four. And above that Estate the number convenient, at their pleasures.

Ex Bibl. Harl. No. 1776. fol. 31. b.

The French Queens, before the Reign of Charles VIII. wore White upon the death of the King; and were called "Reines Blanches." It was changed to Black on the death of Charles VIII. 1498. [See P. Dan. Hist. iv. 590.]

In a Wardrobe account for half a year, to Lady-day 1684 (a MS. purchased by Mr. Brander at the sale of the Library of Geo. Scot, Esq. of Woolston-Hall, 1781), are the following entries for the King's Mourning.

"A Grey Coat lined with Murrey and White flowered Silk, with Gold Loops, and four Crape Hat-bands."

Again, "A Sad-coloured Silk Coat, lined with Gold-striped Lutestring, with Silver-and-Silk Buttons; and a Purple Crape Hatband."

Again, "A Purple Coat."

The Emperor Leopold, who died 1705, never shaved his Beard during the time of Mourning, which often lasted for a long time. [Bancks's Hist. of Austria, p. 277.]

The Empress-Dowagers never lay aside their Mourning, and even their Apartments are hung with Black till their deaths. [Bancks's Hist. of Austria, p. 400. He says this from Baron Polnitz's Memoirs, vol. iv. p. 46.]

The Bavarian Family never give a Black Livery, or line their Coaches, in the deepest Mourning. [Polnitz, i. letter 22.]

The Pope's Nieces never wear Mourning, not even for their nearest Relations; as the Romans reckon it so great a happiness for a Family to have a Pope in it, that nothing ought to afflict his Holiness's kindred. [Polnitz's Memoirs, ii. letter 33.]

Queen Anne, on the death of Prince George of Denmark, wore Black and White, with a mixture of Purple in some part of her Dress. The precedent was taken from that worn by Mary Queen of Scots for the Earl of Darnley, which was exactly in point. [Secret History of England, ii. 299.]

King Charles I. put the Court into Mourning for one Day on the death of the Earl of Portland (Richard Weston), Lord High Treasurer. [Stafford's Letters, i. 389.]

Mrs. Thomas's Great Grand-Father was Mr. Richard Shute, a Turkey Merchant, one of the Members for the City of London, and much favoured by King Charles I. who gave him the Name of Sattin-Shute, by way of distinction from another Branch of the same Name and Family, and from his usually wearing a Sattin Doublet cut upon White Taffata.

"Without doubt," says Mrs. Thomas (for she was her own Biographer), "he was very nice in the mode of that Age, his Valet being some hours every morning in starching his Beard, and curling his Whiskers; but," continues she, "during that time a Gentleman, whom he maintained as a Companion, always read to him on some useful subject." He lived in Leaden-Hall Street, the site on which stands the India House, and had a Country-seat at Berking, in Essex. Here he had a very fine Bowling-green, as he delighted much in that exercise. The King, who was fond of the diversion, once told Mr. Shute, he would dine with him some day, and try his skill on his Bowling-green. The King went, and was so pleased with the place, it being very retired, and likewise with Mr. Shute's skill in Bowling (he being accounted one of the best Bowlers of his time), that he frequently visited afterwards Berking-Hall, without any Guards, and with three or four select Gentlemen, his attendants, when, as the King expressed it, he had a mind to drop State, and enjoy himself as a private man:—"Ah, Shute," said he one day, with a deep sigh, "how much happier than I art thou, in this blessed retirement, free from the cares of a Crown, a factious Ministry, and rebellious Subjects!" They generally played high, and punctually paid their losings; and though Mr. Shute often won, yet the King would, one day, set higher than usual, and, having lost several games, gave over; when Mr. Shute said,—"An please your Majesty, One thousand pounds rubber more, perhaps Luck may turn:"—"No, Shute," replied the King, laying his hand gently on his shoulder, "Thou hast won the day, and much good may it do thee, but I must remember I have a Wife and Children." P. xxi.

This place was afterwards dismantled by Mr. Shute's heir, and in a few years became a ploughed field. The King gave Mr. Shute several places; among which were the Deputy Lieutenancy of the Ordnance, and the Mastership of St. Cross's Hospital, to the amount of four thousand pounds per annum. P. xxv.

These he gave up when the Civil War broke out; and retired to Hamburgh, where he died a few years after the death of the King. P. xxvii.

William the Conqueror played deep; for, tradition says, that Walter Fitzbourne, a Norman Knight, and great Favourite of the King, playing at Chess on a Summer's evening, on the banks of the Ouse, with the King, won all he played for. The King threw down the Board, saying he had nothing more to play for. "Sir," said Sir Walter, "here is land." "There is so," replied the King; "and if thou beatest me this Game also, thine be all the Land on this side the Bourne, or River, which thou canst see as thou sittest." He had the good fortune to win; and the King, clapping him on the shoulder, said, "Henceforth thou shalt no more be called Fitzbourne, but Ousebourne."' Hence it is supposed came the name of Osborne. Life of Corinna, p. xxviii.

Lord Coke, in his 3d Inst. (cap. 51.) speaking of the City of Westminster, says, "It hath its name of 'the Monastery,' which Minster signifieth, and it is called Westminster, in respect of Eastminster, not far from the Tower of London. This Westminster, Sebert, the first King of the East Saxons that was christened, founded." It is added in a note in the margin, Segbert began his Reign A. D. 603.

Lord Coke, however excellent a Lawyer, I fear was but a bad Antiquary; for the reverse rather seems to be the case, as it will appear that Eastminster was so called in respect of Westminster. For in Stowe's Survey of London (edit. 1633), p. 497, he gives the following account of the Foundation of the Church of Westminster:—"This Monasterie was founded and builded in the year 605, by Sebert, King of the East Saxons, upon the perswasion of Ethelbert, King of Kent, who, having embraced Christianity, and being baptized by Melitus, Bishop of London, immediately (to shew himself a Christian indede) built a Church to the honor of God and St. Peter, on the West side of the City of London, in a place, which (because it was overgrown with thornes, and environed with water) the Saxons called 'Thornez,' or 'Thorney;' ... whereupon, partly from the situation to the West, and partly from the Monasterie or Minster, it began to take the name of Westminster:" and then he goes on with the history of that Church.

So far of Westminster. Of Eastminster Stowe gives the following account, by which it will appear that the foundation of Eastminster was subsequent to that of Westminster, by at least 700 years. "In the year 1348," says he, "the 23d of Edward the Third, the first great Pestilence in his time began, and increased so sore, that for want of roome in Church-yards to bury the dead of the City and of the Suburbs, one John Corey, Clerke, procured of Nicholas, Prior of the Holy Trinity within Ealdgate, one toft of ground neere unto East Smithfield, for the buriall of them that dyed; with condition, that it might be called the Church-yard of the Holy Trinity: which ground he caused, by the ayd of divers devout Citizens, to be inclosed with a wall of stone; ... and the same was dedicated by Ralfe Stratford, Bishop of London, where innumerable bodies of the dead, were afterwards buried, and a Chapel built in the same place to the honour of God; to the which King Edward setting his eye (having before, in a tempest on the sea, and peril of drowning, made a vow to build a Monastery to the honour of God, and our Lady of Grace, if God would give him grace to come safe to land), builded there a Monasterie, causing it to be named Eastminster, placing an Abbot and Monks of the Cistercian or White order." P. 117.

In Stowe, p. 751, is a list of all the "Patrones of all the Benefices in London," in which this Foundation seems to be twice mentioned, first as the "Abbey of White Monks," and then as "Mary de Grace, an Abbey of Monkes, by the Towre of London."

Written in or about the Year 1760.

The Societies of the Temple have no Charter; but the Fee was granted by a Patent to the Professors and Students of the Law, to them and their Successors for ever.

The King is Visitor of the Temples; and orders have been sent down from him so lately as Charles the Second's time, for the Regulation of them, which were brought in great form by the Lord Chancellor and twelve Judges, and signed by them.

The Discipline of these Societies was formerly, till within these eighty years, very strict. The Students appeared, upon all occasions, and in all places, in their proper habits; and for neglecting to appear in such habit, or for want of decency in it, they were punished by being put two years backward in their standing. This habit was discontinued, because the Templars having been guilty of riots in some parts of the town, being known by their habits to be such, a reproach was thereby reflected on the Society, for want of discipline.

Commons.—Till there was a relaxation of discipline, the Commons were continued in the Vacation as well as in the Terms; and the Members obliged to attend, upon severe penalties for neglect of it. The Barristers, though they were called to their degree, were not admitted to practise, but by special leave from the Judges, till three years after their call, during which their attendance to Commons, both in Term and Vacation, was not to be compounded for, or dispensed with.

The Law Societies were, at first, under one general regulation and establishment, till they branched out, and divided, as it were, into Colonies. The Societies of each Temple are very zealous in contending for the Antiquity of their Society.

The Society of the Middle Temple must now be very rich; and it consists in money, they having no real estate. I have been assured, that the certain yearly expences of it, exclusive of repairs, amounts to a considerable sum.

The Benchers are generally in number about twenty, though there is no fixed number. They may be called to the Bench at eighteen or twenty years standing. The Bench have power to call whom they think proper of such standing to the Bench; which if they answer not, they pay a Fine of Fifty Pounds.

The Benchers eat at their own expence in this Society, having nothing allowed but their Commons; which few, I believe none, of the Benchers of the other Houses do.

The Readings, which generally were upon some Statute, continued about eight days, when there were Treats and Balls at the Reader's expence; and there is an Order of the House, of no very old date, by which the Reader was restrained from having above Eight Servants, which shews, in some measure, the luxury and expence attending them. They have now been discontinued upwards of seventy years (the last Reader being Sir William Whitlocke, 1684); but there is a Reader still appointed every year, and some small Treat, at the expence of the Society, of Venison, &c.; and the Arms of the Reader are put up in a Pannel in the Hall.

Mr. Bohun, the Writer of several excellent Books in different branches of the Law, having, when he was Reader at New Inn, put up a question tending to Blasphemy, (I think it was, whether the Person of our Saviour was God,) was excommoned by the Society; that is, he was denied the privilege of coming into the Hall, and at the same time obliged to pay for full Commons. They judged expulsion too mild a punishment.

The Old Hall stood on the South side of Pump Court, which, upon building a new one, was converted into Sets of Chambers; and which, by Order of Queen Elizabeth, were not to exceed eight in number. This was soon after pulled down, and Chambers built in its stead.

Library.—Left by Will to the Society, by Astley, a Bencher of it. It contains about Nine Thousand Volumes. Besides this, he left a Set of Chambers, value three hundred pounds, for the maintenance of a Librarian, who at first was a Barrister; but, not being thought worth their acceptance, it is now in the Butler.

Present Hall.—Built by Plowden, who was seven years in perfecting it. He was three years Treasurer successively; and after he quitted the Treasurership, he still continued the direction of the Building.

The Temple Organ was made by Smith. The Societies, being resolved to have a good Organ, employed one Smith and one Harris to make each of them an Organ, value five hundred pounds; and promised that they would give seven hundred pounds for that which proved the best. This was accordingly done, and Smith's was preferred and purchased. The other, made by Harris, was sold to Christ-Church in Dublin; but, being afterwards exchanged for another made by Byfield for four hundred pounds difference, it was sold by Byfield to the Church at Woolwich[378].

Inns of Chancery, like the Halls at Oxford.

New-Inn belongs to the Middle Temple; and at the expiration of a long lease, the Fee Simple will be vested in us.

"Simnel.—Siminellus from the Latin Simila, which signifies the Finest Part of the Flour. Panis similageneus, Simnel Bread. It is mentioned in 'Assisa Panis;' and is still in use, especially in Lent. Bread made into a Simnel shall weigh two shillings less than Wastell Bread." Stat. 51 Henry III.

The Statute, intituled Assisa Panis et Cervisiæ, made Anno 51 Hen. III. Stat. I.; and Anno Dom. 1266. Cotton MS. Claudius, D. 2.

... Panis verò de siminello ponderabit minus de Wastello de duobus solidis, quia bis coctus est.

For the Ordinance for the Assise and Weight of Bread in the City of London, see Stowe's Survey, p. 740, Edit. 1633.

It was sometime called Simnellus, as in the Annals of the Church of Winchester, under the year 1042. "Rex Edwardus instituit, et cartâ confirmavit, ut quoties ipse vel aliquis Successorum suorum Regum Angliæ diadema portaret Wintoniæ vel Wigorniæ vel Westmonasterii; Præcentor loci recipiet de fisco ipsâ die dimidiam marcam, et conventus centum Sumnellos et unun modium vini." But, indeed, the true reading is Siminel.

The English Simnel was the purest White Bread, as in the Book of Battle Abbey. "Panem Regiæ Mensæ aptam, qui Simenel vulgò vocatur[379]."

Simula.—A Manchet, a White Loaf. Among the Customs of the Abbey of Glastonbury: "In diebus solemnibus, cum Fratres fuerunt in cappis, Medonem habuerunt in Justis, et Simulas super mensam, et vinum ad caritatem, et tria generalia." Chartular. Abbat. Glaston. MS. fol. 10.

For the use of Saffron, now used for colouring the Crust of the Simnel, see Shakespear's Winter's Tale; where the Clown (Act iv.) says, "Then I must have Saffron to colour the Warden Pyes."

In a Letter to Edward King, Esq. President of the Society of Antiquaries.

The vulgar notion, though it will not appear to be a vulgar error, is, that Thirteen Pence Halfpenny is the fee of the Executioner in the common line of business at Tyburn[380], and therefore is called Hangman's Wages. The sum is singular, and certainly there is a reason for its having obtained so odious an appellation, though it may not be very obvious.

We find that anciently this Office was, in some parts of the Kingdom, annexed to other Posts; for the Porter of the City of Canterbury was the Executioner for the County of Kent, temporibus Hen. II. and Hen. III. for which he had an allowance from the Sheriff, who was re-imbursed from the Exchequer, of Twenty Shillings per annum[381].

Though this is an Office in great and general disesteem, yet the Sheriffs are much obliged to those who will undertake it, as otherwise the unpleasant and painful duty must fall upon themselves. They are the persons to whom the Law looks for its completion, as they give a Receipt to the Gaoler for the Bodies of condemned Criminals whom they are to punish, or cause to be punished, according to their respective Sentences. The business is of such an invidious nature, that, in the Country, Sheriffs have sometimes had much difficulty to procure an Executioner, as, in the eyes of the lower people, it carries with it a Stigma, apart from any shock that it must give to Humanity and Compassion. I remember a very few years ago, if the News-papers said true, the Sheriff of one of the Inland Counties was very near being obliged to perform the unwelcome Office himself.

So that in fact the Hangman is the Sheriff's immediate Deputy in criminal matters, though there is always, at present, an Under-Sheriff for civil purposes. But, before I bring you to the point in question, it will not be amiss to lead you gradually to it, by inquiring into the nature and dignity of the Office in some particulars, and into the Rank of the Officer, for we have all heard of Squire Ketch. These will be found to be supportable matters, as well as the Fee of Office, which is our ground-work.

The Sheriff is, by being so styled in the King's Patent under the Great Seal, an Esquire, which raises him to that Rank, unless he has previously had the Title adventitiously. None were anciently chosen to this Office, but such Gentlemen whose fortunes and stations would warrant it; so, on the other hand, Merchants, and other liberal branches of the lower order, were admitted first into the rank of Gentlemen, by a grant of Arms, on proper qualifications; from the Earl Marshal, and the Kings of Arms, respectively, according to their Provinces. After a Negotiant has become a Gentleman, courtesy will very soon advance that rank, and give the party the title of Esquire; and so it has happened with the worthy Gentleman before us, for such I shall prove him once with ceremony to have been created. This remarkable case happened in the year 1616, and was as follows. Ralph Brooke, whose real name was Brokesmouth, at that time York Herald, not content with being mischievous, was the most turbulent and malicious man that ever wore the King's Coat. After various malversations in Office, not to the present purpose, he put a trick upon Sir William Segar, Garter King of Arms, which had very nearly cost both of them their places. The story is touched upon in Mr. Anstis's Register of the Order of the Garter[382]; but is more fully and satisfactorily related in the Life of Mr. Camden, prefixed to his "Britannia," to this effect. Ralph Brooke employed a person to carry a Coat of Arms ready drawn to Garter, and to pretend it belonged to one Gregory Brandon, a Gentleman who had formerly lived in London, but then residing in Spain, and to desire Garter to set his hand to it. To prevent deliberation, the messenger was instructed to pretend that the vessel, which was to carry this confirmation into Spain, when it had received the Seal of the Office and Garter's Hand, was just ready to sail[383]. This being done, and the Fees paid, Brooke carries it to Thomas Earl of Arundel, then one of the Commissioners for executing the Office of Earl Marshal; and, in order to vilify Garter, and to represent him as a rapacious negligent Officer, assures his Lordship that those were the Arms of Arragon, with a Canton for Brabant, and that Gregory Brandon was a mean and inconsiderable person. This was true enough; for he was the common Hangman for London and Middlesex. Ralph Brooke afterwards confessed all these circumstances to the Commissioners who represented the Earl Marshal; the consequence of which was, that Garter was, by order of the King, when he heard the case, committed to Prison for negligence, and the Herald for treachery. Be this as we find it, yet was Gregory Brandon the Hangman become a Gentleman, and, as the Bastard says in King John, "could make any Joan a Gentlewoman."

Thus was this Gregory Brandon advanced, perhaps from the state of a Convict, to the rank of a Gentleman; and though it was a personal honour to himself, notwithstanding it was surreptitiously obtained by the Herald, of which Gregory Brandon, Gentleman, was perhaps ignorant, yet did it operate so much on his successors in office, that afterwards it became transferred from the Family to the Officer for the time being; and from Mr. Brandon's popularity, though not of the most desirable kind, the mobility soon improved his rank, and, with a jocular complaisance, gave him the title of Esquire, which remains to this day. I have said that Mr. Brandon was perhaps a Convict; for I know that at York the Hangman has usually been a pardoned Criminal, whose case was deemed venial, and for which the performance of this painful duty to fellow-prisoners was thought a sufficient infliction. It seems too as if this Office had once, like many other important Offices of State, been hereditary; but whether Mr. Brandon had it by descent I cannot say, yet Shakspeare has this passage in Coriolanus[384]:

"Menenius.—Marcius, in a cheap estimation, is worth all your Predecessors, since Deucalion; though, peradventure, some of the best of them were Hereditary Hangmen."

This looks as if the Office of Executioner had run in some Family for a generation or two, at the time when Shakspeare wrote; and that it was a circumstance well understood, and would be well relished, at least by the Galleries. This might indeed, with regard to time, point at the ancestors of Mr. Brandon himself; for it was in the Reign of King James I. that this person was, as we have seen, brought within the pale of Gentility. Nay, more, we are told by Dr. Grey, in his Notes on Shakspeare[385], that from this Gentleman, the Hangmen, his Successors, bore for a considerable time his Christian name of Gregory, though not his Arms, they being a personal honour, till a greater man arose, viz. Jack Ketch, who entailed the present official name on all who have hitherto followed him[386].

Whether the name of Ketch be not the provincial pronunciation of Catch among the Cockneys, I have my doubts, though I have printed authority to confront me; for that learned and laborious Compiler, B. E. Gent. the Editor of the Canting Dictionary, says that Jack Kitch, for so he spells it, was the real name of a Hangman, which has become that of all his successors. When this great man lived, for such we must suppose him to have been, and renowned for his popularity or dexterity, Biographical History is silent.

So much for this important Office itself; and we must now look to the Emoluments which appertain to it, and assign a reason why Thirteen Pence Halfpenny should be esteemed the standard Fee for this definitive stroke of the law.

Hogarth has given a fine Picture of the sang-froid of an Executioner in his Print of the London Apprentice; where the Mr. Ketch for the time being is lolling upon the Gallows, and smoaking his Pipe; waiting, with the utmost indifference, for the arrival of the Cart and the Mob that close the melancholy Procession. But Use becomes Nature in things at which even Nature herself revolts.

Before we proceed to matters of a pecuniary nature, having said so much upon the Executioner, permit me to step out of the way for a moment, and add a word or two on the Executioné, which will explain a Yorkshire saying. It was for the most unsuspected crime imaginable, that the truly unfortunate man who gave rise to the adage suffered the Sentence of the Law at York. He was a Saddler at Bawtry, and occasioned this saying, often applied among the lower people to a man who quits his friends too early, and will not stay to finish his bottle; "That he will be hanged for leaving his liquor, like the Saddler of Bawtry." The case was this: There was formerly, and indeed it has not long been suppressed, an Ale-house, to this day called "The Gallows House," situate between the City of York and their Tyburne; at which House the Cart used always to stop; and there the Convict and the other parties were refreshed with liquors; but the rash and precipitate Saddler, under Sentence, and on his road to the fatal Tree, refused this little regale, and hastened on to the Place of Execution—when, very soon after he was turned-off, a Reprieve arrived; insomuch that, had he stopped, as was usual, at the Gallows House, the time consumed there would have been the means of saving his life; so that he was hanged, as truly as unhappily, for leaving his liquor.

The same compliment was anciently paid to Convicts, on their passage to Tyburne, at St. Giles's Hospital; for we are told by Stowe[387], that they were there presented with a Bowl of Ale, called "St. Giles's Bowl;" "thereof to drink at their pleasure, as their last refreshing in this life." This place (Tyburne) was the established scene of Executions in common cases so long ago as the first year of King Henry IV; Smithfield and St. Giles's Field being reserved for persons of higher rank, and for crimes of uncommon magnitude; such as treason and heresy: in the last of these, Sir John Oldcastle, Lord Cobham, was burnt, or rather roasted, alive; having been hanged up over the fire by a chain which went round his waist[388].

The Execution of the Duke of Monmouth (in July 1685) was peculiarly unsuccessful in the operation.

The Duke said to the Executioner, "Here are Six Guineas for you: pray do your business well; do not serve me as you did my Lord Russell: I have heard you struck him three or four times. Here" (to his Servant); "take these remaining Guineas, and give them to him if he does his work well."

Executioner.—"I hope I shall."

Monmouth.—"If you strike me twice, I cannot promise you not to stir. Pr'ythee let me feel the Axe." He felt the edge, and said, "I fear it is not sharp enough."

Executioner.—"It is sharp enough, and heavy enough."

The Executioner proceeded to do his office; but the Note says, "it was under such distraction of mind, that he fell into the very error which the Duke had so earnestly cautioned him to avoid; wounding him so slightly, that he lifted up his head, and looked him in the face, as if to upbraid him for making his death painful; but said nothing. He then prostrated himself again, and received two other ineffectual blows; upon which the Executioner threw down his Axe in a fit of horror; crying out, "he could not finish his work." but, on being brought to himself by the threats of the Sheriffs, took up the fatal weapon again, and at two other strokes made a shift to separate the Head from the Body." [Lord Somers's Tracts, vol. I. pp. 219, 220; the Note taken from the Review of the Reigns of Charles and James, p. 885.]

As to the Fee itself, which has occasioned me to give you so much trouble, I incline to think this seeming singular sum must have been of Scottish extraction, though not used for the like purpose; for, I presume, from the value of money there, a man might formerly be hanged at a much cheaper rate, and that we have it by transplantation. The Scottish Mark (not ideal or nominal money, like our Mark) was a Silver Coin, in value Thirteen Pence Halfpenny and Two Placks, or Two-Thirds of a Penny; which Plack is likewise a Coin. This, their Mark, bears the same proportion to their Pound, which is Twenty Pence, as our Mark does to our Pound, or Twenty Shillings; being Two-Thirds of it. By these divisions and sub-divisions of their Penny (for they have a still smaller piece, called a Bodel or Half a Plack) they can reckon with the greatest minuteness, and buy much less quantities of any article than we can[389]. This Scottish Mark was, upon the Union of the two Crowns in the person of King James I. made current in England at the value of Thirteen Pence Half-penny (without regarding the fraction), by Proclamation, in the first year of that King; where it is said, that "the Coin of Silver, called the Mark Piece, shall be from henceforth currant within the said Kingdom of England, at the value of Thirteen Pence Halfpeny[390]." This, probably, was a revolution in the current money in favour of the Officer of whom we have been speaking, whose Fee before was perhaps no more than a Shilling. There is, however, very good reason to conclude, from the singularity of the sum, that the odious title of Hangman's Wages became at this time, or soon after, applicable to the sum of Thirteen Pence Halfpenny. Though it was contingent, yet at that time it was very considerable pay; when one Shilling per diem was a standing annual stipend to many respectable Officers of various kinds.

After having discovered the pay of an Office, one naturally inquires for Perquisites and other Emoluments; for all posts, from the High Chancellor to the Hangman, carry some; and which, in many cases, as well as this, often exceed the established pay itself. Nothing can well vary more than the Perquisites of this Office; for it is well known that Jack Ketch has a Post-obit interest in the Convict, being entitled to his Cloaths, or to a composition for them; though, on the other hand, they must very frequently be such Garments that, as Shakspeare says, "a Hangman would bury with those who wore them[391]."

This emolument is of no modern date; and has an affinity to other Droits on very dissimilar occasions, which will be mentioned presently. The Executioner's perquisite is at least as old as Henry VIII.; for Sir Thomas More, on the morning of his Execution, put on his best Gown, which was of Silk Camlet, sent him as a present, while he was in the Tower, by a Citizen of Lucca with whom he had been in correspondence; but the Lieutenant of the Tower was of opinion that a worse Gown would be good enough for the person who was to have it, meaning the Executioner, and prevailed upon Sir Thomas to change it, which he did for one made of frize[392]. Thus the antiquity of this obitual emolument, so well known in Shakspeare's time, seems well established; and, as to its nature, has a strong resemblance to a fee of a much longer standing, and formerly received by Officers of very great respectability: for anciently Garter King of Arms had specifically the Gown of the Party on the creation of a Peer; and again, when Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, and Priors, did homage to the King, their upper garment was the perquisite even of the Lord Chamberlain of the Household. The fee in the latter case was always compounded for, though Garter's was often formerly received in kind, inasmuch as the Statute which gives this fee to the Lord Chamberlain, directs the composition, because, as the words are, "it is more convenient that religious men should fine for their upper garment, than to be stripped[393]." The same delicate necessity does not operate in the Hangman's case; and his fee extends much farther than either of them, he being entitled to all the sufferer's garments, having first rendered them useless to the party. Besides this perquisite, there has always been a pecuniary compliment, where it could possibly be afforded, given by the Sufferer to the Executioner, to induce him to be speedy and dexterous in the operation, which seems to be of still greater antiquity; for Sir Thomas More tells us that St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, gave his Executioner thirty pieces of gold; and Sir Thomas himself gave (according to his Historian, his Great Grandson), on the like occasion, an angel of gold, being almost the last penny he had left. These outward gifts may likewise be understood as tokens of inward forgiveness.

Upon the whole, Sir, I conceive that what I have offered above, though with much enlargement, is the meaning of the ignominious term affixed to the sum of Thirteen Pence Halfpenny; and cannot but commiserate those for whom it is to be paid.

I am, Sir,

Your faithful humble Servant,
SAMUEL PEGGE.

On the great road from London to West Chester, we find, at the principal Inns, the Coats of Arms of several Lord Lieutenants of Ireland, framed, and hung up in the best rooms. At the bottom of these Armorial Pictures (as I may call them) is a full display of all the Titles of the Party, together with the date of the year when each Viceroyship commenced. I have often inquired the reason of this custom, but never could procure a satisfactory answer. I do not reprobate the idea of this relique of ancient dignity, as these Heraldic Monuments were doubtless intended to operate as public evidences of the passage of each Lord-Deputy to his delegated Government. They now seem only to be preserved for the gratification of the vanity of the capital Inn-keepers, by shewing to Humble Travellers that such and such Lord-Lieutenants did them the honour to stop at their houses; and yet I will not say, but that for half-a-crown handsomely offered to his Excellency's Gentleman, they might likewise become part of the furniture of every alehouse in Dunstable.

After fruitless inquiry, accident furnished me with the ground of this custom, which now only serves to excite a little transitory curiosity. Having occasion to look into Sir Dudley Digge's "Complete Ambassador," published in 1654, I was obliged to the Editor for a solution, who, in the Preface (signed A. H.), speaking of the reserve of the English Ambassadors, in not making public their Negotiations, has this observation:—"We have hardly any notion of them but by their Arms, which are hung up in Inns where they passed."

This paragraph at once accounts for the point before us, and is sufficient, at the same time, to shew that the custom was anciently, and even in the seventeenth century, common to every Ambassador, though it now only survives with those who go in the greater and more elevated line of Royal representation to Ireland.

SAMUEL PEGGE.

THE END.

Of the Publishers of this Work may be had

ANONYMIANA;
OR,
TEN CENTURIES OF OBSERVATIONS
ON VARIOUS AUTHORS AND SUBJECTS;

(Compiled by the late very Learned and Reverend
Dr. PEGGE);

With a copious Index.——8vo. Price 12s.

"Whether as an Antiquary, a classical, poetical, and historical Critick, a Biographer, or Enquirer into the Beauties and Niceties of Grammar and Languages, we find everywhere that Dr. Pegge's remarks are not only striking and useful, but original; and, in this last respect, we have little hesitation in preferring the Anonymiana to the greater part of the Works of this description, which have been lately published, either at home or abroad. There is scarcely a taste among the various divisions of human liking, that will not find something appropriate and gratifying. It would be impossible to withhold, in these times of levity, just praise from a Work that so ably combines 'light reading' with 'serious thinking.'"

Gent. Mag. 1809.

————
ANECDOTES
OF THE
ENGLISH LANGUAGE,

chiefly regarding the Local Dialect of London and it's Environs; whence it will appear, that the Natives of the Metropolis, and its Vicinities, have not corrupted the Language of their Ancestors.

By SAMUEL PEGGE, Esq. F.S.A.
Second Edition, enlarged and corrected.

To which is added, A SUPPLEMENT to the PROVINCIAL
GLOSSARY of FRANCIS GROSE, Esq.

8vo. Price 12s. boards.

⁂ The Provincial Glossary may be had separate, Price 3s.

Printed at the VOTES Printing Office, King Street, Westminster,
By Nichols, Son, and Bentley.