2'"i S. X. Skpt. 29, '60.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



251 



PREVENTION OF RAIN. 

 (2"'i S. X. 207.) 



Granting the complete success of Mens. Helve- 

 tlus Otto's " Pluvifuges," a very interesting legal 

 question arises. 



Would not an action for damages He against 

 the workers of the machines in Town A., in case 

 of Towns B. and C. suffering from the undue 

 quantity of rain which would be liable to fall to 

 their share, if town A, succeeded in puffing it all 

 away from themselves ? for the vapour blown 

 from one place, must needs be blown to some 

 other. Of say that Towns B., C, and even D. and 

 E. were as sharp-witted as town A., and set up 

 equally efficacious machines ; there certainly ought 

 to be some redress for town F., in case of its 

 being altogether submerged, as might very pos- 

 sibly happen, under such circumstances. 



This delicate point of law ought surely to be 

 well looked into, before the " Pluvifuges " are 

 fairly at work ! 



Nil mortalihus ardiium est. If Mons. Ilelve- 

 tius Otto would turn his Ingenious mind to the 

 annihilation of the vapour which forms the rain- 

 clouds, or invent a vapour-restrainer to regulate 

 the quantity which shall go up from the earth 

 and tropical seas, it would be much more to the 

 purpose. 



As it is, if the vapour Is once In the air, and 

 cannot, even by his " Pluvifuges," be propelled 

 into that chimerical locality, " empty space," why 

 then it cannot be got rid of altogether ; and if it 

 does not fall liei-e, will inevitably come down 

 thei'e ; and the farmers round Town F. ought de- 

 cidedly to be compensated, should their sheaves 

 be floating breast deep in water, because Towns 

 A. B. C. D. and E. decline having any rain at all. 



Allowing a little scope to the imaginative fa- 

 culty, one can easily conceive the possible occur- 

 rence, in a few years, of cases in the Law Courts, 

 as follows : — 



" Smith V. Brown. This was an action for 

 recovery of damages for injury done to Plaintiff, 

 from tlie inconsiderate use, by Defendant, of his 

 private ' Pluvifuge,' on the occasion of John 

 Brown, Esq., Juniox*, Defendant John Brown, 

 Esq., of Brownhill Park's, eldest son, coming of age, 

 and a fine day for an out-door /ete being wanted. 



" Plaintiff, John Smith, Esq., of Smithville, 

 brought numerous witnesses to show that the day 

 having been fine up to 12 o'clock, and no appear- 

 ance of rain ; wind steady — north-north-west- 

 by-west, it was decided that the dance in honour 

 of his daughter's marriage should bo held in the 

 bowling-green,, ten minutes' walk from the house; 

 but that at half-past 3 o'clock in the afternoon, 

 the diijeuner being over, the ladies and gentlemen 

 assembled, and the band seated, a sudden dark- 



ening of the sky came on, and a volume of clouds 

 was observed rapidly approaching from a south- 

 south-east-by-east direction, which, before the 

 party had) time to [retreat to shelter, burst on 

 their devoted heads ; and from information sub- 

 sequently obtained, it could be proved that this 

 same volume of clouds had been puffed away from 

 the Defendant's, John Brown's, Esq., of Brownhill 

 Park, on the same day a few hours previously. 

 Distances were minutely given, rate of movement 

 of rain-clouds calculated, and witnesses called on 

 both sides. Damages laid : for injury to ladies' 

 dresses, 500Z. ; doctor's bills for subsequent ca- 

 tarrhs, 50/. Verdict for the Plaintiff, 550Z. and 

 costs." The Ci.erk or the Weathee OmcE. 



CARADOC FREICHFRAS, ETC. 

 (2°^ S. X. 217.) 



In an illuminated pedigree bearing date 1674, by 

 Randle Holme of Chester, the arms given are : az. 

 a lion rampant per fesse or and arg. within a bor- 

 dure of the last. But the coat described by Mr, 

 Gbesford has the authority of the College of 

 Arms, by whom the other, with the addition of 

 eight pellets in the bordure, is attributed to Lu- 

 thoka (written Llydoc by Holme), the son of 

 Caradoc. Mr. Papworth, in his Ordinary^ now 

 in course of publication, agrees with Holme as to 

 the arms of Caradoc Freichfras, except in the 

 bordure, which is described as " silver semy of 

 annulets sa" (p. 118.) Nefydd Hardd, of whom 

 Mr. Gresfoed speaks, is named in Burke's Ar- 

 mory as founder of the sixth noble tribe of Wales ; 

 but his arms are given somewhat differently, the 

 colours being reversed and the chevron omitted. 

 There seems to be some doubt respecting the 

 rank of Caradoc Freichfras. The title given him 

 in the Heralds' College is Earl of Hereford ; and 

 Pennant, mentioning his death at the battle of 

 Ruddlan, a.d. 795, gives him the same (Tour, 

 vol. i. p. 250.) ; but when afterwards speaking of 

 the same battle, he writes that " our monarch Ca- 

 radoc fell In the conflict" (vol. il. p. 11.) And in 

 Lloyd's History, by Powel, to which Pennant 

 makes reference In both places, Caradoc is called 

 King of North Wales (ed. 1811, p. 17.) Ami 

 to understand that two Caradocs lost their lives at 

 Ruddlan, or that Vreichfras, once Earl of Here- 

 ford, died a king? There is nothing extraordi- 

 nary in the latter supposition, notwithstanding 

 the authority of the College of Arms : for Mer- 

 vyn Vrych, called by Powel King of the Brytains, 

 the father and predecessor of Roderic Mawr, has 

 from them only his original title of Earl of Angle- 

 sey. But it does seem rather strange that Pen- 

 nant, if he meant the same pei'son, should have 

 spoken of him so differently. 



I have two more Queries to put: the first of 



