lenge him to do this. If he cannot do this, if my corrections are unassailable, surely it would be better that he should hold his peace. Mr. Hall, as will be seen from his letter, only ventures to join issue on one point, and even on that he is compelled to admit that my rule is "substantially correct." Unable to assail it in the case of the Record under discussion-which by the application of my rule is indisputably restored to its true and original sense-he takes refuge in a sorry quibble which even his special pleading cannot make good. For had he been conversant with the subject he would have known that such a name as De Curcy, Salvage, or Hacket, was no "arbitrary and indefinite appendix," but can be proved to have been a recognised surname transmissible from father to son (cf. ante, iii. 126). Consequently, as I explained (ante, pp. 179-80), you could have, for instance, a "Peter Fitz William" or a "Peter Hacket," but by no possibility could you have such a form as the "Peter Fitz William Hacket" of the Calendar, by which two individuals, father and son, are distinctly rolled into one. In the second place, “as may be clearly seen," even by referring to Mr. Hall's letter, he has utterly misunderstood, on his own showing, the circumstances of the case on which he would rely. In the said case, John does not figure merely as "filius Thome." The writ is brought (ante, pp. 183, 279) against "Alice, wife of T. de G. and J., son of the said Thomas," i.e., Thomas de G. Now in this J. Filius prædicti Thome, i.e., J. filius Thome de G, we have an exact parallel to the Milo filius Foh' de Curcy of our Record (ante, p. 177).** In each case, by the rule I suggested, filius means "the son of," and can mean nothing else. In each case the Editor, and therefore Mr. Hall, would on the contrary render it "Fitz," and combine it with the following words as part of the surname. This is precisely what Trewith tried to do, and what Stonore scornfully dismissed. The counsel, as Mr. Hall well observes, "hard pushed" (like himself), had recourse (like himself) to a sorry quibble, and urged that filius formed part of a surname. Whereupon, on the very principle of my own rule, Stonore indig. nantly "thunders,"" it will never be adjudged a surname" (ante, p. 183). Whereby W. is non-suited, and the Editor (and Mr. Hall) with him. And not only does Stonore protest that filius cannot here form part of the surname, but he adds, as I do, that here it can mean nothing but "the son of":"You have called him in Latin the son of Thomas," i.e., Thomas de G., which essential words, I regret to see, Mr. Hall cannot even quote correctly. For Stonore's indignant "you have called him," he substitutes the utterly unmeaning words, "you hear him called!" We thus perceive that, as I said, this case has been "utterly misunderstood" by Mr. Hall. But this could also be proved by the reductio ad absurdum. For if his interpretation were correct we should indeed glean some curious "information upon antiquarian law." We should learn that, even in 1338-9, the law did not as yet recognise filius, when followed, as I explained, by a Christian name alone, as forming part of a surname, and this, too, when such surnames as Fitz Alan, Fitz Walter, Fitz Warrene, and Fitz Payne, &c., had for generations been household words! Every member, for instance, of the great house of Fitz Alan, for two hundred years before this date, must, according to Mr. Hall, as a "Filius Alani" The closeness of the parallel results from the fact that in both cases the parties were youths, and were therefore as yet only known as "the sons of" their fathers. have been in the eyes of the law the son of a man called Alan! Surely no wilder proposition ever emanated from an antiquary's brain. Mr. Hall is good enough to observe that "we do not look to Mr. Round for information upon antiquarian law." I never asked or expected that anyone should; yet in this case it may perhaps occur to our readers that Mr. Hall could hardly have made a more unlucky hit. 1 With reference to perdono my critic does but "imagine" that holes "could" be picked in my exposition. I need therefore only point out that this "exposition" gave, at any rate, the true practical explanation of the passages to which I referred. It restored, at any rate, the original meaning to what was simply unintelligible nonsense (ante, p. 180). "What is to be thought of the candour or learning" (to quote an expression employed by Mr. Hall) of a critic who insinuates that the explanation which turns nonsense into sense is actually worse than the blunders by which sense is turned into nonsense! So much is Mr. Hall at a loss for arguments that he has to charge me with attacking "a gentle scholar" for not possessing a smattering of genealogy." As for genealogical criticism, I specially observed (ante, p. 181), that I reserved it for another quarter. The errors I have corrected are not those which arise from mere ignorance of genealogy. As for the personal matter, Mr. Hall knows full well that I am not criticising the unofficial work of a mere amateur, such as myself. I am criticising a Government Calendar, which appears with all the splendid prestige of the Rolls Series, and in which students would consequently place an all too implicit trust. It is a thankless task, as I know to my cost, to expose the false and strive for the true; but Mr. Hall may rest assured that I am not to be extinguished either by a taunt at "jeering critics," or by the cynical "cui bono" of complacent error. I would still hope, however, that we may not have to class among those who "love not the light" one who has himself by his patient researches done so much to correct the mistakes of others. Brighton. J. H. ROUND. OLD TIME TENURES. (See vol. iii. p. 77.) SIR, I have not seen Blount's book, but I should like to point out that the authenticity of the version of the grant which is said to have been accorded by John of Gaunt to one Burgoyne, and to which Mr. Trowsdale in his paper makes allusion, is doubted by the Oracle of November 26, 1881. The September number of the Scots Magazine for the year 1786, quoting Longmate's supplement to the fifth edition of Collins's Peerage, says the grant in question was made to the Bassets, of Heanton Court, Devonshire, and was worded thus: "I, John of Gaunt, Do freely give and grant, To thee and thine, The Barton-Fee Of Umberleigh." Leith, N.B. P. J. MULLIN. TO CORRESPONDENTS. THE Editor declines to pledge himself for the safety or return of MSS. voluntarily tendered to him by strangers. Books Received. 1. Bye-gone Beauties; ten portraits from Paintings by John Hoppner, R.A. By A. W. Tuer. Folio. Field & Tuer. 1884. 2. London Cries. By A. W. Tuer. 4to. Field & Tuer. 1884. 3. Punjab Notes and Queries. No. ii. Trübner & Co. 4. Harness. By John Philipson. Edward Stanford. 1883. 5. Robin Hood. By Joseph Hunter. Worksop: R. White. 1883. 6. English Etchings. December, 1883. W. Reeves, 185, Fleet-street. 7. British Almanack and Companion, 1884. Stationers' Company. 8. Shakespeariana. No. i. Trübner & Co. 9. History of Aylesbury. Part viii. Aylesbury: R. Gibbs. 1883. 10. Western Antiquary. Part vii. Plymouth: Latimer & Son, Nov., 1883. II. Index Number of Western Antiquary. Vol. ii. Plymouth : Latimer & Son. 1883. 12. Greater London. Vol. i. By E. Walford, M.A. Cassell & Co. 1883. 13. On Scandinavian Place Names. By the Rev. E. M. Cole. York: J. Sampson. 14. An Essay on the Genius of George Cruikshank. By W. M. Thackeray, with a prefatory note by W. C. Church. G. Redway. 1883. 15. Historical Notices of the King's Manor, York. By R. Davies, F.S.A. 1883. 16. The Young Idea. By the Author of "Culmshire Folk," &c. Remington & Co. 1883. Books, &c., for Sale. Guardian Newspaper, from commencement to 1864, bound; and 186570, in numbers. Offers to E. Walford, Hyde Park Mansions, Edgwareroad, N.W. Books, ec., Wanted to Purchase. Wanted, Franks of several Peers and M.P.'s to complete a collection of the Parliament 1835-37. Address "O.," Ripley, Yorkshire. Dodd's Church History, 8vo., vols. i. ii. and v.; Waagen's Art and Artists in England, vol. i.; East Anglian, vol. i., Nos. 26 and 29. The Family Topographer, by Samuel Tymms, vols. iii. and iv.; Notes and Queries, 4th series, vols. vii., viii. (1871); 5th series, vols. vi., vii. (1876-7) ; also the third Index. Penny Magazine, 1843. A New Display of the Beauties of England, vol. i., 1774. Chambers' Cyclopædia of English Literature, vol. i. Address, E. Walford, 2, Hyde Park Mansions, Edgeware-road, N.W. Antiquarian Magazine and Bibliographer, several copies of No. 2 (February, 1882) are wanted, in order to complete sets. Copies of the current number will be given in exchange at the office. |