302 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 204. 



Libb, of Haidwick, Oxon ; and soon afterwards 

 we find them placed under the care of a clergy- 

 man at Appleshaw. But here we seem to lose 

 sight of them altogether. 



Mr. Hughes savs that the only sons who married 

 were George, the heir, and John, the younger 

 brother ; but we have no evidence of this ; and as 

 it is probable that some of the others, namely, 

 Richard, Anthony, William, Francis, and Robert, 

 married, I wish to procure proof either that they 

 did or did not. If any of these married, I wish to 

 know which of them, to whom, and when and 

 where. 



Perhaps some of your correspondents can tell 

 me where Richard, Anthony, and William re- 

 sided, and what became of Francis and Robert 

 after they had left their tutor, the minister of 

 Appleshaw. Newburiensis. 



Wheale (Vol. vi., p. 579. ; Vol. vii., p. 96.).— 

 Since this word is once more brought forward in 

 " N. & Q." (Vol. viii., p. 208.), I will answer the 

 Query respecting it. I was prepared to do so 

 shortly after it first appeared, but I had reason to 

 expect a reply from one more conversant with 

 such archaisms. If the Querist, or either respon- 

 dent, had examined the context, he could not 

 have failed to discover a clue to the meaning, as 

 the words " gall of dragons " instead of " wine," 

 and " wheale " instead of " milk," are evidently 

 translations of some expressions in tlie preface of 

 Pope SIxtus (or Xystus) V., to his edition of the 

 Vulgate. The words there are "fel draconum pro 

 yino, pro lacte sanies obtruderetur." W^heale more 

 commonly signified, in later times, a pustule or 

 boil; but it is from the Ang.-Sax. hwele, putre- 

 faction. The bad taste of such language is too 

 manifest to require farther comment. 



If I were disposed to conclude with a Query, I 

 might ask where Q. found that wheale ever meant 

 whey f W. S. W. 



Middle Temple. 



Sir Arthur Aston (Vol. viii., p. 126.). — He was 

 appointed Governor of Reading, November 29, 

 1642 ; that his relative, Geo. Tattershall, Esq., 

 was of Stapleford, Wilts, and only purchased the 

 estate. West Court in Finchampstead, which went, 

 on the marriage of his daughter, to the Hon. Chas. 

 Howard, fourth son of the Eaii of Arundel, and 

 was sold by him. A Reader. 



^^ A Mockery," g^c. (Vol. viii., p. 244.). — Thomas 

 Lord Denman is the author of the phrase in ques- 

 tion. That noble lord, in giving his judgment in 

 the case of O'Connell and others against the Queen, 

 in the House of Lords, September 4, 1844, thus 

 alluded to the judgment of the Court of Queen's 

 Bench in Ireland, overruling the challenge by the 

 traversers to the array, on account of the fraudu- 



lent omission of fifty-nine names from the list of 

 jurors of the county of the city of Dublin : 



" If it is possible that such a practice as that which 

 has taken place in the present instance should be al- 

 lowed to pass without a remedy (and no other remedy 

 has been suggested), trial by jury itself, instead of 

 being a security to persons who are accused, will be a 

 delusion, a mockery, and a snare" 



See Clark and Finnelly's Reports of Cases in the 

 House of Lords, vol. xi. p. 351. C. H. Cooper. 

 Cambridge. 



Norman of Winster (Vol. viii., p. 126.). — I do 

 not know if W. is aware that there was a family 

 of Norman who was possessed of a share of the 

 manor of Beeley, in the parish of Ashford, Derby- 

 shh'e, which came from the Savilles, the said 

 manor having been purchased by Wm. Saville, 

 Esq., 1687. A Reader. 



Arms of the See of York (Vol. viii., pp. 34. 111. 

 233.). — Thoroton has a curious note on this sub- 

 ject in his History of Nottinghamshire (South 

 Muskham, in the east window of the chancel), from 

 which it would appear that neither Thoroton 

 himself, nor his after-editor Thoresby, could be 

 aware of the change that had taken place. The 

 note, however, may help to complete the catena 

 of those incumbents of the see of York who 

 (prior to Cardinal Wolsey) boi-e the same arms as 

 the see of Canterbury : 



" There are the arms of the see of Canterbury, im- 

 paling Arc/, three hoars' heads erased and erected sable. 

 Booth, I doubt mistaken for the arms of Fork, as they 

 are with Archbishop Lee's again in the same window ; 

 and in the hall window at Newstede the see of Canter- 

 bury impales Savage, who was Archbishop of York also, 

 but not of Canterbury that I know of." — Vol. iii. 

 p. 152., ed. Notts, 1796, 



Can any of your antiquarian contributors say 

 why the sees of Canterbury and York bore 

 originally the same arms ? Had it any relation 

 to the struggle for precedence carried on for so 

 many years between the two sees ? J. Sansom. 



Mr. Waller, in his volume on Monumental 

 Brasses, in describing that of William de Gren- 

 feld. Archbishop of York, says : 



" The arms of the two archiepiscopal sees were for- 

 merly the same, and continued to be so till the Re- 

 formation, when the pall surmounting a crozier was 

 retained by Canterbury, and the cross keys and tiara 

 (emblematic of St. Peter, to wliom the minster is de- 

 dicated), which until then had been used only for the 

 church of York, were adopted as the armorial bearings 

 of the see." 

 To the word " tiara " he appends a note : 



« Or rather at this period a regal crown, the tiara 

 having been superseded in the reign of Henry VIII." 



