2nd §, No 11., Man, 1b. 56. ] 
Canterbury, died in February, 1413, and was suc- 
ceeded by Henry Chicheley, who died in April, 
1443. See Dugdale’s Monasticon (1817—30), 
vol. i. p. 86. The nephew of Pope Martin V. 
could not therefore have been Archbishop of Can- 
terbury during his uncle’s pontificate; nor is it 
probable that he held any benefices in England by 
the Pope’s appointment, as the statute of Pra- 
munire was then in existence, and enforced ; for 
Andrews states in his History of Great Britain, 
that Pope Martin V. denounced, by his legate, 
curses of the most fatal kind against the English 
king, parliament, and people, for not repealing 
» this statute, which deprived him of ihe power to 
dispose of livings in Englund. “ His high words” 
were however “ disregarded.” Wight Wa gle: 
Somerset House. 
Hillier Family (2°9 §. i. 53.) — In looking over 
the old churchwarden’s book of this parish, I find 
the name of Roger Hiller (Hillier?) mentioned 
as churchwarden in 1621, and again in 1675. I 
am sorry I cannot give C. H. P. any further in- 
formation respecting this family: I should not 
have thought the above worth sending, had 
C. H. P. not mentioned “Johan Hillier” as 
steward of the manor of Cirencester in 1685; 
and as Cirencester is only ten miles from Tetbury, 
and the dates also correspond, it is not unlikely 
they were of the same family. Atrrep T. Lex. 
Tetbury, Gloucestershire. 
Tom Thumb (2°4 §. i. 154.) — Mr. Witson has 
entamé avery interesting subject in this Query. 
Tom Thumb takes a higher rank than a mere his- 
torical personage can ever be entitled to assume. 
His narrative belongs to that far-extended family 
of tales of enchantment and wonder, which has its 
roots in the primeval mythology of the Scandi- 
navian and Teutonic peoples. It is almost unne- 
cessary to observe that mythology forms no insig- 
nificant portion of the evidence of ethnology, or 
the family history of tribes and nations. ‘om 
Thumb is a prominent actor in the Kinder und 
hauswirehen of the Brothers Grimm, and the 
Contes du Temps passé of Perrault. But the 
learned editor of the “N. & Q.” has given a re- 
ference to an English metrical history of our 
worthy published in 1630, 7. e. nearly seventy 
years before Perrault’s tales appeared. This fact, 
whilst it shows that we did not import Tom 
Thumb into England in modern times, affords a 
reasonable presumption that he came into Britain 
with the Anglo-Saxons, as part of their circu- 
lating library. Tom ‘Thumb, however, is not the 
only nursery favourite which can claim an ancient 
position in England. Mr. B. Thorpe’s observa- 
tion at p. 125. of his Yule Tide Stories, shows that 
Cinderella should rank in the same category, and 
that we do not owe her to M. Perrault. ‘Lhe same 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
223 
remark appears to apply to “Jack in the Bean 
Stalk,” “ Puss in Boots,” “ Jack the Giant Killer,” 
and ‘Beauty and the Beast,” which not only all 
bear the impress of northern fiction, but are actu- 
ally still found in the nursery tales of Scan- 
dinavia. But what are the earliest forms (now 
existing) of these myths in England? And where 
are they to be found—in print or in MS.? 
Hickathrift, too, deserves a Note. a nt Ce 
Curious Right to appoint a Coroner (2°49 §. i. 
115.) — The last presentation of a coroner for the 
hundred of High Peak, co. Derby, was made by 
the late Rev. Francis Foxlowe. The Horn after- 
wards became the property of his widow, who 
affected to devise the estates which were left to 
her by her husband to his grand-nephew, Francis 
Edward Greaves, the second son of H. M. Greaves, 
Esq., of Banner Cross (see Burke's Landed Gentry, 
ed. of 1853, p. 416. of the Supplement.) ; but the 
Horn not being specifically mentioned, and there 
being no general devise of real estate in Mrs. 
Foxlowe’s will, the right in the Horn became 
vested in her cousin and heir-at-law, the late 
Alexander Slater, Esq., of London, who died on 
the 27th January last, but by arrangement be- 
tween Mr. H. M. Greaves and Mr. Slater, the 
Horn, and the presentation to the office of co- 
roner, became vested in the former gentleman, 
who thereupon exercised his right in favour of 
Mr. F. G. Bennett, as stated in the current vo- 
lume of “ N. & Q.” In the documents which ac- 
company this ancient symbol, the right is styled 
“ prima pars agard.”’ We. Sz. 
Sheffield. 
Armorial Queries (1% S. xii. 449.) — As a very 
imperfect reply to these Queries I beg to say that 
the arms to No.5. are those of Nash; No. 13. 
probably Mitchell ; and No. 32. those of Nichols. 
Several others might have been discovered had 
De C. fully blazoned each coat; and before he 
charges the Heralds’ Collegé with defective Or- 
dinaries, he should have blazoned each coat pro- 
perly, for not one in his whole series is complete 
in blazon. For instance, No. 23., Or, a lion de- 
bruised by a baton gobony, might have been dis- 
covered had the colours of the baton been given ; 
as there are several such coats in the ordinaries 
at the Heralds’ College, having the baton, but of 
different tinctures: the same of others. 
Fecrauts. 
Dog-whippers (1* S. x. 188.)—The office is 
not extinct, though the necessity for its exercise 
may no longer exist. ‘* Dog-whipping, 2s. 6d.” 
still forms a regular item in the annual accounts 
of the sexton of the Collegiate Church of Middle- 
| ham, and is no less regularly paid. Me teste, 
T. H. Kersrey, B.A. 
Canon and Sub-Dean. 
