CIHM Microfiche Series (IMonographs) iCMH Collection de microfiches (monographies) Canadian Inatituta for Hiatorieal MIcforaprodtictiena / Inatitut Ca n a d ian da nd c ro r aprodiictiena hiatoHquaa T«ahiiiMl and nfeSofrapMi TiM Instituti hM atlMipttd to obnin tfM bat orifiMi copy mhwdw raff f ilRiiii0. FMtHfw OT viis oopy wMili of wM iiiHi0M in tho wynffwnniy vi CfMdWO DOlOW. r^ Cotonrad eoMn/ |_J Coywrtura dt of iMMn^ 9n CoMra D D □ CoMT thla mMnt/ UlHradx COMT* and/or lamiMtid/ M/OMI D Coloiifvd CartM r~^ Cototmd lAli (i.a. MMr than bhM or Mask)/ 1 * I Enera da «e«daiir(i^.aiitrt qua Manaeu noire) D D Coloofad piatH and/or iNumationi/ PlanolMt at/oo iNurtrationa an ( Bound urMi othar malarial/ fiaMa«aed'a«trai< T IfR* MfNNflf MSy i L8 ffWNIfV SMVW pMn CMM0ff Ot dtotovsioii It lonftft It mtfftt IntMtiiit idala I I ^HtMl NtVtt MMtO wllffMf ftSlOfttMII NUy tppt ' ' witfihi lilt itxt* Wlitfitvtr poviMt, tfmt htvt I oMmw Tram Tnmffipf Iocs vunt itctMmiioii itdantlal D :/ TMt Ham i> fNnMd at tha raduation fade vt tfotiMiitfit ffst fftmt ttt ttttx ot ftduction in^^iii ti'^ttioiift* 10X 14X ttx 12X ItX aox L'imtitiit a nderefiim* la luiaMpoMiMadaw Will loat point da v 4111 paHvant modniaf ona □ Cotowad pa|B>/ h|aida< as 0^ atfao p aMlc i dt ai □ OoaHty of print voriat/ Qualit* in«|ala da rimpra ui on □ Continuow pagination/ tafination eontinua □ IndMdas indaxlat)/ Comprand on (das) indax Tidaonl La titia da I'an-lMa previant: □ TitlapafaefiMw/ Pfefi da tHra da la liwaiion □ Caption of isMa/ Titra da dipart da la livraiMn j iMaitiMad/ I 1 Ote irH i ia (pn, or tha back covar whan approprlata. AN othar original copias ara filmad baglnning on tha first paga with a printad or Miustratad impras- slon, and anding on tha last paga with a printad or Hlustratad imprasslon. Lss imagaa suhmntss ont 4tti raproduitaa avae la plus grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at da la nattat* da l'axamplaira film*, at an conf ormiti avac las conditions du contrat da filmaga. Laa axamplairaa originaux dont la eouvartura an papiar ast imprimto sont fHmte on comman^nt par la pramlar plat at an tarminant soit par la damMra paga qui comporta una amprainta dlmpraashm ou dlHustration, soH par la aacond plat, aalon la cas. Tous laa autraa axamplairas originaux sont fUmte un commanfant par la pramlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta dimpraaaion ou d'lHuatration at an tarminant par la damiAra paga qui comporta una taNa amprainta. Tha last raeordad frama on aach microficha shaN contain tha symbol '•^ (maaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol ▼ (maaning "END"), wMchavar appNas. Un daa symbolaa sulvants apparattra sur la damMra Imaga da chaqua microficha. saton la caa: la symbols — ^ signHia "A 8UIVRE". la aymbola ▼ aignHia "NN". Maps, piataa. eliarts, ate., may ba filmad at cNffarant raduction ratkis. Thosa too larga to ^a antiraly inchidad in ona axpoaura ara filmad baglnning in tha uppar laft hand comar, iaft to right and top to bottom, as many framaa aa raqulrad. This following diagrams IHustrsta tba mathod: Laa cartas, pianchaa. tabl a a ux . ate., pauvant ttra fHmte i.^aa laux da rMuctkMi « M fM r a n ts. i^fsqua la doeumant oat trop grand pour Atra raproduit an un saul cMchi, 11 aat film* i partkr da I'angia supMaur gaucha, da gaucha i droha, at da haut an baa. an pranant la nombra dimagaa nioassaka. Laa dkigrammaa auivants HhMtrsntla m4thoda. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 IKMIinON TBI OHAflT (ANSI ond ISO TEST CHAUT No. 2) 1.0 1.1 ■^■2J 111 ^^ LM 12.2 i^ i^ iJjB ^ fM3 Eait Main SIml (7l<)2a8-3M9-r« k-n t^A- , ii {9. ' ^"""'^ 'WMMRNRM^ITI^M c C^VL/ud^*^'^ f^d^^-^^jM, \-'\ f (! 880931 -t-l f^ '•» ^*/^ N I -^' -"J "^ // i aie Ebwatb rtiatfon Cba6wfch ^nte5 for private Cfrcnlation «bc Cburcb of Sngtand »ni)U«b«aM rfio*^ iJuSiauSt Many of those who maintain the opinion that arms can be borne only by Royal grant pro- bably do so more as a matter of expediency than as a matured and well-founded opinion, no doubt considering it advisable to uphold the authority of the officers of arms, and to re- quire that all armorial matters should pass under the cognizance of such officers. In these pages' it is proposed to consider matters as they are, and not as either the writer or any other person may think that they ought to be. mtmS *"■ ''°™* ^y four titles, viz. : inheritance, grant, transfer, and assumption. The mention of the last will no doubt be greeted by some readers with a note of interrogation, but the explana- tion of the term, and the reason for its use, will appear subsequently. In mentioning such titles it is usual to include prescription, al- though some regard that as debatable, but it f.S&f*'21!I" "T"" ****««> •'"He (ucHn, nobility), ud NoMcm* CeotlraaeB-GomnKMwn in BncUnd. He .5»T^hrKiS? STTi^ In otber wordi, tbe creatioa of nobkaee, even bv thTlCh^r?.!!!.; ^'•'' Jif^"** W«I*»*ntly of any rayiU net, m ta t£ aSTS con«K the KKul trade of noHeaee. by the men &ct of tenureT^ is here omitted because prescription is founded upon and necessarily derived from inheritance, and forms but a branch of that source or manner of title. Armorial bearings are a Snbecftance freehold of inheritance de- scending from father to son. And here we may observe a material differ- ence between heraldic insignia and "honours," properly so-called, for the latter. If not for the life only of the possessor, descend to one per- son only, to the exclusion of all others, except only in the case of falling into abeyance, which, however, is not really an exception, for one only of the coheirs can inherit, and the abeyance only exists until that one is indicated. But heraldic insignia descend to all the sons of the possessor, and to all his daughters also ; but in the case of the latter for life only, unless the male descent fails. According to strict heraldic rule when armorials descend to bro- thers, all but the eldest should assume differ- ences, but this rule is nowhere observed except in Scotland, where cadets are forbidden to use or display their arms until they have been "matriculated" or entered in the office ot Lyon King of Arms, when a proper difference is assigned. But there are few Scottish cadets who consider themselves under obligation to comply with this rule. It is confidently asserted that Scottish heraldry rigidly reserves to the male representative of each family the exclusive right to the undifferenced family coat, and that no Scottish arms of cadets are recognized unless duly differenced. Two instances occur to the writer where this rule has not been observed. The arms of Munro of Foulis, chief of the name, are. Or, an eagle's head erased gu. These arms without difference were borne by a cadet of another branch of that family, Sir Hector Munro, installed Knight of the Bath 1779- The arms of Strachan of Gienkindie are, Am., a stag trippatU or, attirtd and unguled gu. The same arms are recorded as borne in 1776 by WilUam Strachan, a cadet of another branch, that of Thornton; and in 1839 by Bishop Strachan of Toronto. In England and Ireland differences are formally assigned where a new branch of a family arises, and desires official recognition, and such differences are assigned with but slight regard to nearness or otherwise of relationship to the previously recorded possessor of the arms. In the case of descent of armorials to the daughters, they all take alike and without regard to seniority. If, and so long as, ihey have a brother or descendants of a brother, they only bear the arms for life, but if they have no brother, or having had a brother and all his descendants male and female have failed, then they bear the arms as a freehold of inheritance and trans- mit them to their own descendants. A woman thus bearing arms is heraldically known as an heiress. Her husband bears her arms on an escutcheon of pretence, and her children bear them quartered with their paternal coat. Heraldic purists strenu- PreSCrfpttOn ously dispute the right to bear arms by prescription, and, while admitting that such right is recog- nized by Irish practice, assert that no arms can exist in England which have escaped notice in the course of the Heralds' Visitations.* Although such assertion is by no means conclu- sive, it may be passed over for the present. r.rS" -•"•WO" two tiuuuicM of unncorded amu l»nU Sr.»t^ OM dated ,590, and the otb^cSSSTtliSi. dS. i^^i But it may be observed, ea passant, that it is tolerably plain that the heralds in their visita. tions recognized arms prescriptively borne. In Scotland many armorial bearings have been borne by prescription from time immemorial, and are borne to this day in entire disregard of the statute enacted in that kingdom forbidding the bearing of arms unless registered; this statute we shall have occasion to refer to again. In Ireland arms are entered in Ulster's office on proof of user for three generations, but if they are the same as already recorded as tK)me, either in that or one of the other kingdoms, a proper difference is assigned. The term "grant" is commonly Orant used to signify the assigning of arms by some person in authority; but the expression is not accurate. The Crown' "grants" lands, as does also a private person, the lands being already in existence and in the possession of the grantor. The sovereign "creates" a title of honour; creare est aliquid ex nihilo facere. Arms newly devised might, perhaps, be better spoken of as •« assigned," using that word as a heraldic technical term in the sense of designating or appointing. But as lO the word "grant" is commonly employed, it will be convenient to use it in these pages. A grant of arms may be made by the King, or by any officer deputed or appointed by him for that purpose : this much all heralds are agreed upon as a statement which is not open to question ; but there is a difference of opinion as to whether any exclusive prerogative in tiie Crown to make or authorize such grants exists or not. The writer who uses the uom de plume of " X " may be presumed to have said, in his work on the Right to Bear Arms, aU that can be said in favor of a jurisdiction over armorials being an exclusive royal prerogative, and this he has entirely failed to establish, for he quotes no authority to show that such prerogative has ever exclusively vested in the sovereign, except- ing a recital in a grant of arms by Charles I, wiiich was of no validity, and cannot be quoted as a precedent or autiiority, for much more than such a recital is and was necessary to change tiie laws of England ; that quotation, therefore, does not close tiie argument or set- tie the point. Now the eariiest written statement of the heraldic law of England is the famous Soke of «M II St. Alban's. printed in the fir.t year of the reign of Hennr VII. and beln,f supposed to be be the printing of a long previously existing manuscript work used in the education of the young gentlemen of England. After stating how arms are borne, firstly by descent; secondly by conquest, a manner then used but now obsolete; the Boke continues. "On the thride maner of whise whe have armys the wich we beere by the graunting of a prince or of sum •other lordys," i.e.. In the third manner of wise we have arms which we bear by the grant of a pnnce or some other lord. Here we have a statement which is in effect that any person of promment position, who in feudal day. would aZ 'Vr] °' ""*'"' '•^"' "*••' ^-t arms Th,s law has never been abrogated or altered. Armorial bearings are theoretically of a mihtary character, and, therefore, it is a reasonable proposition that any person having a mihta^r command and power to grant mili- tary commissions may, in due consistency with the theory and principles of heraldry, grant arms.* * tt^"^~:4ss«s*ss la ThU mode of acquiring title to TCranBfer arm* is referred to, aa the writer it not aware of any good reason for its omission, although it is not now prac- tised, unless, perhaps, by the not unusual con- dition in wills and settlements requiring a beneficiary to assume the name and arms ot the testator or settlor. But there are known instances of persons having transferred their own armorial insignia to others in a manner similar to a conveyance of lands : See Wood- ward's Heraldry British and Foreign, ii, 40a. Now let us again consult BSSlimpnon the Boke of St. Alban's, and we find the following r "The "faurith maner of whise we have thoos armys " the wich we take on owre awne ppur auctor- "ite. as in theys days opynly we se. how •• many poore men by thayr grace favoure lab- "oure or deservyng: ar made nobuls. Sum "by theyr prudens. Sd bi ther mahod. sA "bi ther strength. sA by ther conig. sfl bi "od vtuys. And of theys men mony by theyr "awne autorite have take armys to be borne •ithi. hi. own StitTbrSrchSttte oSv^iSS;? ^•*'"' •"* ""^"""y r «3 "to theym Md to ther hayris of whoom it "nedy. not here to reherse ye namys. Nev "the lees armys that be to takyn they may "lefuUy and frely beer. Bot yit they be not ••of so gntt dignyte and autorite as thoos " armys the wich ar grauntyt day by day by ••the autorite of a prynce or of a lorde. Yet •'armys bi a mannys propur auctorite take: if " an other man have not borne theym afore : ••be of strength enogh." It is interesting to •dd the paragraph of the Soke immediately following the above: "And it is the opynyon ••of moni men that an herrod of armis may ••gyve armys. Bot I say if any sych army, ••be borne by any herrod gyvyn that thoos ••armys be of no more auctorite then thoos "armys the wich be take by a mannys ••awne auctorite." In modern language the above is as follows: The fourth manner of wise we have those arms which we take on our own proper authority; as in these days openly we see how many poor men by their grace, favour, labour, or deserving, are made nobles (i.e., rise in the social scale), some by their prudence, some by their manliness, some by their strength, some by their cunning (i.e., knowledge or .kill), .ome by other vlrtuee. And of theee men. many by their own authority have taken arm. to be borne to them and their heir,, of whom it need, not here to rehear., the name.. NevertheleM, «nn. that are .o taken they may lawfully and freely bear. But yet they are not of so great dignity and authority a. tho« arm. which are granted day by day by the authority of a prince or of . lord. Yet arm. by man', proper (i.e., own) authority taken, if another man have not borne them before, are of valid- «ty enough. And it i. the opinion of many men that a herald of arm. may give arm.. But I «ay. if any .uch arm. be borne by any herald given, that those arm. are of no more authority than tho.e arm. which are Uken by a man', own authority. Here we have a voice, plain and unequiv- ocal. from the palmy day. of heraldry in Eag. land. ^ Five years before the book quoted was pub- lished (or rather republished, the modem edition being a facsimile of an orgioal black-letter copy, reproduced by photographic process), the writer contributed an article on heraldry fll to 7ii# Wf»*, In which he ventured the opin- ion th«t arms might be aHumed by any pereon of his own will, provided two rules were observed, vis: the arms must be properly heraldic in design and character; and they must not be the same as, or so similar as to be confounded with, arms already borne by some other person. The observations then made by the writer are closely and quite curiously par- alleled by the passage quoted. The opinions expressed, and which at the time required •ome little courage to put forth, were arrived at after careful consideration of the subject, the writer, however, retaining an open mind and being prepared to accept any good and well founded sutement to the contrary, untU the appearance of "X's" work, which seemed to him to fail so completely in estabUshing a contrary opinion, that a perusal of it only tended to confirm the views of the writer, who is now able to quote in support of such views an authority which seems to him to be con- clusive. It will be urged, no doubt, that a recog- nition of the liberty to persons to assume arms as they please, will lead to heraldic chaos ; but |6 that if not tb« rttult of Mp«ri«iic«. for it i« a fact which cannot b« dlspat«l tut manx p«r. •on* havt auumad •rms, within th« put ctntury .t the l«Mt, and w. do not find any ■uch .rmi (born, by privata parion.) of an tacongroui or non-htraldic characttr, for thoaa •nna which ara of luch dascription hava. in fact, b««i dariawl bjr profaatiooal haralda and form, •lly grantad. It ia, of couraa. vary daairabla that all anna ahould ba officially ragiatarad, but tha quaation of axpediancy i. one thin^ and tha actual atata of tha law ia anothar. The opinions which may ba held by one per- •on or many persona aa to what is expedient doaa not make law. Those who maintain that arma ^nonrC may be. granted only by the King or those authorized by by him. found their strongest argument on the •seertion that armorial bearings are "honours," and therefore proceed from the Fountain of honour. But this is altogether faUadous. Armorials may be and often have been hon- ours conferred as such in particular cases, such as honourable augmentations, and certain coats which have been especially conferred to »7 mark or rword som* famoui exploit of the itnnr. It is om of the common delusion* regarding heraldic matters that all arms art what may be termed historic memorials, and many legends have been invented to lit partic- ular coats, but such stories are in most cases mere fairy tales, and the fact is that memorial arms are quite exceptional, and there are very few which can be so classed with any rerjon. able «ruinty or even probability. Compared with tiie vast number (certainly 25,000, per- haps twice as many), borne in the British Empire, honourable augmentations are ex- tremely rare. It is another delusion which sometimes affects people whose arms are Uif- ferenced, that the change in their arms, which they perceive but do not rightly comprehend, i« an honourable augmenUtion. Supporters, as they are usually accessories to the arms of a nobleman, and are inherited with the title, approach nearly to the status of honours ; but not altogether so, because they are frequently borne by corporations (such, for example, as the Hudson's Bay Company, the East India Company, .ind various others); and in modem times they have come to be regarded i8 as proper accessories to arms of colonial gov- ernments, e.g., Cape Colony, long borne, but only lately granted, or perhaps rather recog- nized, for the grant has been made in an exceptional manner; also British Columbia, where the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, about five years ago, assumed arms as an' official act, with supporters. There is another consideration CUBtOm bearing upon the question of the right to assume arms, which must receive attention. Long established custom has the force of law. Disregarding the chivalric era, which has spoken to us through the Soke of St. Alban's, and passing over the Stuart and Georgian period, of heraldic debasement.* it i, now a long established custom, or practice of widely spread usage, to bear arms which are unknown to the Heralds' College. There is no law or authority in England or Ireland which can interfere with or prevent any per- son bearing arms by an assumptive title. If iU ' ili «9 any herald should attempt in these days to impose upon any person any indignity because he chose to bear arms of his own devising, it is the herald whom the law would punish, and not the other. All persons in England KCOfBtratfOn who use armorial bearings an^ TTaSatlOn re required to obtain a license to do so, and to pay an annual tax ; and anyone infringing the law in this respect is liable to a fine. But it must be observed that the Court which imposes the fine makes no enquiry as to the right or title which the bearer has to the armorials he uses but only as to the fact of the use, and the non-payment of the tax. In the foregoing observations SCOttiSb we have made some exceptions XaW with regard to Scotland, for here the right to bear arms has been the subject of parliamentary enactment. In 1663 an act was passed forbidding "cadents," or cadets, to bear arms unless matriculated and differenced, but this act was repealed in the following year. Ten years later another act* ao ordered all persons using arms to give in description of them, with their lineage, to the Lyon Clerk, so that they might be regis, tered, and that after a year and a day no one should "use any other armes." With regard to this enactment we may observe, firstly, that «t «as passed in the period of heraldic decad. ence ; and secondly, that it has been, and is more honoured in the breach than in thi observance, and it is arguable that it has become effete by reason of long non-observ- ance-but on this point the writer does not venture a definite opinion ; and thirdly, that It IS not in force out of Scotland. In the preamble of the Act referred to it is recited that "many have assumed to them- "selves armes who should bear none, and "many of those who may in law bear have "assumed to themselves ye armes of their "Chieff without distinctions, or armes which ••were not carried by them or their predices- ••sors." The Statute unmistakably recognizes arms borne by prescription-in view of Scot- tish, and especially Highland, social history It could not possibly do otherwise-so that the meaning of the reference to those assum- *t ing arms "who should bear none" is not very clear. Read together with some following references in the Statute to those " who may in law bear," we may possibly have some sug- gestion of the notion, sometime prevalent, which connected the bearing of arms with pos- session of land; or perhaps it may be a vague shadow of the French ideas which had been introduced into Scotland. That it can be in- tended to refer to any previously defined law or regulation regarding the acquisition and use of armorials is negatived by the whole tenor of the Statute. Whether the act is still in force or not, it IS, at any rate, still the heraldic rule in Scot- land that "cadents" or cadets must matricu- late their arms and procure differences to be assigned to them; and this rule is also applied whenever the opportunity occurs, in case of persons of Scottish descent living in the Colo- nies. Thus, upon a title being conferred upon any such person, it becomes necessary for him to matriculate his arms. Except in such cases there .s nothing to prevent any one of Scot- tish descent living in the Colonies from using the arms of his family as freely as those of other origin may do. as I I It iii;;i The consideration of thii Hr0Umentd subject unavoidably require! Of "f." notice of "The Right to Bear X (to which reference has already been made), and of which a second edition ha. been issued by him, probably because he has been conscious that the first failed to estab- lish his contention, a position which the second does not greatly amend. It may be advan- tageous to refer very briefly to two or three of the more important arguments or evidences which he adduces. ..X," while without hesi- tation declaring the Judges of the Courts ot Uw to be incompetent to adjudicate upon heraldic matters, when their decisions are against his opinions, quotes certain cases which he considers to support his contention, but which on examination do not at 9U appear to do so. For example, Joicey-Cecil v. Joicey- Cecil (p. ,46), in which a testator imposed a condition of the taking of his name and arms, and on the occasion for doing so aris- ing, it was discovered that the arms used by the testator were wrongfully used, being those of another person, and consequently could not iiij: ! »3 be assumed in compliance with the direction, and .t appearing that the testator never used or claimed any other arms, it was held that the condition so far as concerned arms was ^effective and compliance with it not requisite. Th.s case goes no farther than to declare the I'.H ihat one n,., cannot acquire title to the am.orial, of another by assuming or using ">em. -nie ancient and oft.quoted contest between Scrope and Grosvenor (p. 40). was also decided upon the principle that one having used certain arms another could not adopt he same or a similar coat. ..X" refers to this case as supporting his contentions of an exclusive royal prerogative, which it does not do, but rather the reverse. Much stress i, laid by - X » upon a warrant of K. Charles II, which he quotes (p. 48). ^antmg to a certain person and his wife authority to assume a certain surname and arms, reciting in .he document that .'neither of wh,eh may regularly be done according to the laws of arms without the special dis- pensation and license of us. as we are by Our Supreme power and prerogative the only fountain of honour." Such a recital •i ii liii could not override or alter previously exist- log law or create a new law. Its value may be Ifauged, firstly, by the fact that the Stuarts brought into England notions of the Royal prerogative which the English people would not accept, as the troubles of that period amply attest ; they were for four generation, or more closely intimate with the Court of France, where such notions prevailed to the fullest extent ; and Charles II himself lived for twelve year* in France, and his Queen was a French princess ; secondly, this was the period of heraldic decadence, in which all sorts of absurdities were foisted upon Leraldry. lead- ing to the utter debasement into which it fell in the ensuing Georgian period ; and, thirdly, the law of England regarding changes of name has been plainly declared by judicial decision to be that anyone who chooses, and does so in good faith, may change his name of his own accord ;♦ therefore if the recital in K. Charies' warrant has not made a change of name illegal or irregular, neither has it made the ass umption of arms, not being those of as Mother person, illegal or irregular; both things are in the same category. In the opinion of the vWter the strongest evidence brought forward by -X" in support of h.s contention, is the early heraldic visita- tjon (tenp. Hen^r VIIl) where the King of Arms is commissioned to examine armorial, in h.. province and to deface, etc.. arm. improp- erly borne, and to inflict dire punishment, and indignities upon offenders ; for at this time the debasement of heraldry had only begun. But the tenor of such commissions does not seem to be really more than the srrandiloquent Ian- Ruage of the period, for. as .« X " shows, the actual execution of their powers by the visiting heralds was done in a very mild-mannered way It will be well to observe, too. that the heralds were commissioned not only to regu- late armorials, but also "to reforme and comptroll " the mourning to be worn at funer- als. and in various ways to iaterfere with the 1'bert.es of the King's liege, in a manner which would certainly not be tolerated in a later age-and probably were not generally submitted to even in Tudor times. The attitude of the heralds in their visita- T'' "'"• '^■'"^•'^ P'""«»«I"« -n it. terri. blene., to the co„tum.ciou.. was „o.t I.nient «.t. practice to the more amenable. And wh.le they maintained an appearance of requir- •ng the very strictest evidence of right to •rmonal bearing, found in use. and of layine down ngid rule, by which such right must b! confirmation, easily obtainable by those whose evidence fell short of the standard^even to th. extent of gauging their 'fees" by the depth of purse of the visited. And in this re- spect they did right, and their actions were "ore m accordance with true heraldry than their woj^s. Indeed, it is evident that the herald, themselves often had a truer apprecia- fon of heraldry (and surely have still, though etiquette doe, not permit them to .ay so) thL their unprofessional advocates. But the writer has no intention to go through "XV work and refute hi, argument, or pomt out his fallacies.; time and space at h., disposal will not permit, for it would re- quire a volume to do so fully; and it is need- less, because generally speaking the argument, are inconclusive, and the fallacies obvious- »1 every one of his argument, i. capable of easy refutation, and hi, evidences may all be ex- plamed, and sometimes, indeed, shown to lead to conclusions quite different from those he Wishes to establish. But the proclamation of Hen^r V. which he mentions (p. 44), deserves attention. In order to support his arguments "X" sets out this document under the heading of "Writ of "•7 ^ «if"»ating coat armour." which is -...descriptive and misleading, for it is no more than an order that the person, to be enrolled for a certain .ervice must be those who have borne arms previous to that time, and that those who assume armorials for the occasion are not to be admitted. In a later page (,99) ..x," more suo.» refers again to the writ quoted, stat- mg that "Henn. V decreed that arms borne without authority were to be stripped off and broken up." a statement which the document does not support; "without authority" is "X's" rendering, and is not the language or effect of the o ngmal. The translation of the docu- article in the C»iUem*M^Ir^l»Lj Pretty Mreraly ctiticiHtl 'mol •^ "X" .«! lUI hvSpinSSlrurSUL." "^^ '^""TwSlX «^«..^«. colours, In ord.r to brio^lUnto •».t«. i. tr«.d.t«l ..rwk." which I., forced rendering. So f.r from being . "det -•«• forbidding the „.„n,pUon of L..^. writ I. evidence of the f.ct th.t .nn. were EXt """"•' "''-' -^ - - »-• It i.. no doubt, quit. uncon«rfou.ly th.c X furnuhe. evidence which overthrow, the very contention Which Mr. Fo,.D.vi... th. ^ tor of "Armori.! Famine.." who writ., in th. ««.. .tr-n M ..X." (and I. gen.rally .up. Po-d to be the ,ame per,on). .trenuoueh^ n...f upon. «.d Which i. Indeed the key of the r po..t.on. n.n,.ly. that no pereon can be a "gentleman." either In theor, or in fact unle., he pos.e..e. a coat of arm. by actuj 8™nttohim..,,orca„prov.d..centL„^ •rmonal anceetor. He print, (p. ,,3) . aLV'^v '""""•'••" ^««5 to a man the o«";':'°°''=°""'"P»°*''«-m.nt the official seal wa, attached to the grant must upon the theory referred to. have been absolutely wanting in the condition of gentility, and their parents of course no better; never- , *9 thel... th. grant j,.elf with due .oI.m„lty describ*. th. grantee. •• the wn of "S. F. of etc., gtntkman, deceaeed," «,d the daughter of "T. P. of etc., gtntUmoH, deceaeed." Profeetional heralda are under. tjeralWc stood to be precluded by the ®pmiOn etiquette of their office from pub- Hcly expresaing opinion, on .uch . que.tlon a. that now under conalderatlon, .o what their view, are can only be .urmiaed. It may be noted, however, that Sir Bernard Burlce. Ulster King of Arm.. |„ hi, work on Colonial Gentry recognlae. many coats of arm. as used, which are not recorded.* In Seton's -Scottish Heraldry" there I. a paragraph (p. 86) which contain, what may be «sumed to be the opinions of three successive heralds of acknowledged authority, namely, the wnter himself, a, he quotes with seeming ap. proval, firstly, Nisbet. a well-known writer of about the beginning of the Eighteenth Century and secondly. Camden, a professional herald. The par agraph i. as follows :~ 30 ••1 ••P«r«te trMtiM cntitlMl 'A- » "of th. ««i ""•'" »• commMcemeot •••th «^ J^ • °' Armorie rtquir. •^ . When younger brethren do JT n^Jydo be.r their Arm. with such . d^ "consulted with.1, ,nd .uch difff "hou... .re to be M.i«.J ^ ^•'•''"•' ^'^ "hi. ««•„;♦„ . M«8med and e.tabH.hed by "Z^ '.K "' "^ *•"-«? ""fit brieure. •nay euher prejudge the««lve. or the JZ' "•N'sbet. '«s congruous to our law, and <>< 3' h.th.rto th,y h.v. done. «,d m.y .pp,„ ,^ h. Lyon ofHc. for .ulubl. c.iff.L.7/.nd »»>• i^vic of .om. pr..„„pt„o„. «Holi.V ;;wh.^yor.ntln,..h..^^^^^^^ Thi. plainly recogn«e. the [^ of the „. ~n,pt.on and uee of .m,orl.,. without the .Id of thoM .n authority, and doe. not .u„e.t th«t • breach of any law I. th-r-K f thoixrh - , thereby committed: «^ough e,pre„|„^ a de.lre for heraldic act. b..njr don. under competent advi«-in Jch no doubt, all p.r«,n. will agree. wnt on heraldic matter, of recent time. In W.Eccle..a.tlcalHeraldo.» (p. «).„;.: of;iir„r;"""*'^^'''~*«"*^-> «•» •the hi ^^" -Jway, been eligible for the h|rhe.t ecdeslaetlcal po.ltlon.. and on obta. g , Hem have often, down to the p^: »ent day aeeumed armorial bearing, for u.e "Pon their ..a... etc.. though ^uen"" the connection of the prelate with the family 32 "whose arms were adopted was, to say the least, extremely difficult of proof. Occa- "sionally permission to use their arms was "sought by the Prelate from the head and "othar member, of the family to which he desired to attach himself. In France, and 'probably in other countries, it is usual for a "Bishop to invent for himself a coat of "arms, if he is not entitled by birth to bear "one." And again (p. 8.) : "J have alluded to the "practice by which a Bishop who possessed no armorial bearings by inheritance generally "assumed for himself either a coat borne by a "family of the same name, from whom he "supposed he might have descended; or. and "with much greater propriety, an entirely new "coat; and this is the custom still both among "Anglican Bishops and those of the Roman "obedience." In this work Dr. Woodward describes and Illustrates many arms of modern Sees, espe- cially Colonial, which are officially unknown to the Heralds' College, and these are so shown pari passu with more ancient Episco- pal armorials. 33 Dr. Woodward, as he informed the writer » purposed writing a treatise on the Uw and Practice of Heraldry, and had collected material for the work, but he died before its completion, to the great loss of heraldic literature, to which such a work by so eminent and able a writer would have been a valuable contribution. It IS. of course, impossible to say what the con- tents of such a book might have been, but the writer has good reason to believe that it would have been widely different in substance, as ,t undoubtedly would have been in manner of expression, from "The Right to Bear Arms" ("X") and "Armorial Families" (Fox- Davies). Since the foregoing pages went into the printer's hands, the writer has obtained a copy of Hulme's "Heraldry" («d ed. ,897 ; an ex- cellent work), in which he finds inserted at full length, the passages in the Boke of St. Alban's on the manner in which arms were acquired andjights by which they were borne, of which uou(iiaxDrau) Uvfa oomplimwii 34 the part immediately relating to the subject -ow under consideration are quoted in a pr I friuns from expressing any opinion of his own but as he allows the quotation, to stand ^2 -rlc w.thout comment, his silence is eloquent TmiK^ °"' '"•'J*''* naturally leads i'Car ntmi and it is one which is not u„ . . . ''"^y ***y to answer. Title by .nhentance vests in all descendants of th ancestor, no matter what their social status «r condition may be. So th«. *k rather Wh. *''* ''"***'on « rather Who may acquire arms? the answer to whe- between the worthy and the unworthy • and as all will not agree upon how and where' such a line should be drawn th. becomes one of opinion ,„ fo '""'"" a« « • • . "P'l'on. In formmg such an opm,on .t should be borne in mind that ordmary armorials are not '« honours."-.. X" and ^1 His school to the contra^ notwithstand. .ng-but merely the insignia by which families fZ ']:'T"^^y - p^t-iaiiy distinguis :; from other families. The writer will no doubt be expected tc express an opinion, which he 35 therefore does, but speaking only for himself and .n a general way. leaving it to others to concur or not as they may think best. The following are those whom he considers to be of sufficient social degree to appropriately bear arms m Canada : Members of Parliament, and of he Provincial Ugislatures ; Officers of the c.v,l service of at least the grade of Chief clerk, or. m outside service, of an equivalent grade. such as Collectors of custom. • • ^ « customs m important ports, and Postmasters of the larger cities ; Mayors of towns, and Aldermen of cities Wardens of counties. Sheriffs and Registrars; Professors .n the universities, and Masters ot arts; Pnests of the Anglican and Roman Catho. he churchesMthere is no equivalent line which can be drawn with regard to ministers of other rehgious bodies, but they will easily fi„d places .n other classification) ; Captains of militia. Lieutenants m the Royal Navy and Royal Naval Reserve, and officers of equivalent rank in the coloma naval services; Barristers-at-law ; Doc tors^of medicine ; Civil engineers. Architects. and Und surveyor. ; Banker., wholesale Mer. cant, .nd Manufacturer. ..Veo^enposse^:^ o land, of the value of $8,000. «.d of suit- ab educafon. (but not farn,e,.t) ; and all o hers who are of liberal education, or of in. l7o ad^rr:"' °' """«" »° '" ««-«» Zl T *'*" '"'°'='-*'°^ - f»-'y even erms w.th such persons as are above particu. larly mentioned. P-riicu- XL ^*^°*"«^ P**f«« have been written. hand r^ ' ;° '""* ''• ""**^ ™^y "« -We to hand to h,s friends a statement of reasons for opm.ons wh.ch he has expressed i„ conversation and correspondence, and partly because of a de- «re to protest, feebly though it may be. against he extravagant and impudent distortions of true heraldry which have been put forth by X, and (or. alias) Mr. Fox-Davies. The wnter does not expect an acceptance of all his v«ws^. deeply-rooted prejudices are not to be WM enactad in 1400 and .a^ ••■~ioinin« nomaa. In Scotlana ft Scotch H«^~"p ,6), <«» exacuhon of documwu (S«o?i 37 overcome by a little pamphlet ; „or does he «nv.te such acceptance, for it is to him a matter of small moment whether his views prevail widely or not, excepting so far as they are a vindication of the right of the many housands of persons who. in perfect good fe. h. use armorials of which the Heralds- College has no (official) knowledge. [In case of this ^rk coming into the hands of persons to ^hom the ^ter is unkn^, it ' t C""'" ""' '^^^ 'Opposition of the contrary nught be considered to ^aken his arguments)^ ./I /""' /A. writer personally is not L of those v,hose rights he upholds, but is, in fact a per^ „hom Mr. Fox-Davies nanus in "aL^. *al Fantilus," and "guarantees to be genuinely anmgerousr and therefore feels that he Jy con^nd attention .hen he speahs for tJe ^^ Mr. F.,.Davies-^t unjustly-r,fers to quoted, and much less polite.] Colontel public Htma a QUESTION which has especial interest for US in Canada, and which is closely connected with the subject of discussion in this pamphlet, though to be considered from a somewhat different poJnt of view, is that of the power, of colonial governments res- pectmg their own armorials. Every government, paramount or subordi- nate. must have a great seal, and therefore has an mherent right to compose, as it may pease, the devices to be displayed on such sea^. Such devices are heraldic, that is. Pjctonally symbolic. By the common custom of Chnstendom. such devices, whether skilfully and tastefully composed or otherwise, are generally, at least, if not quite always, in armonal form. Therefore every government has a generally recognized inherent right to dev.se arm, for its own use. In the case o^ subordinate governments, such right may be limited by the «iir>...:^. oy ine superior government, but 38 39 by some .xpr.., .« ^ud not merely by implication. In the .bwnce of .ny ,„ch ex- press act. the inherent right stand, good Colonial arm. so assumed and borne are expressly recognized by the Admiralty, apart from the seal on which they are borne ; the seal, bearing the arms, is, of course, recog- nized by all authorities. The question was raised in a case of Unoir V. Ritchie. S.C. III. S7S, where the validity of a Nova Scotian patent was challenged on the ground that it was not sealed with the proper Great Seal of the Province. Before the case was disposed of, however, the Par- hament of Canada interfered and passed a Declarator. Act. 40 Vic. c. 3. by which it was declared that "the Lieutenant-Governor of each Province in Council has the power of appointing and of altering from time to time the Great Seal of the Province." In 1895 the Province of British Columbia, by Order-m.Council. assumed a complete achievement, with supporters, which is bor.. on the Great Seal of the Province.