dnd §, No16,, Aprit 19. °56.] 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
321 
Replies to Minor Queries. 
Rev. Robert Montgomery (2 S. i. 293.) —The 
question respecting the late Mr. Montgomery's 
true patronymic was long ago set at rest by in- 
disputable evidence; but as it has again been 
revived, I hope your pages will set at rest for ever 
a most foolish surmise. 
The following is an extract from the Quarterly 
Review, vol. liii. p. 287. (No. 105., Feb. 1835) :— 
“ Note on p. 492., No. 104. 
“‘ We are concerned to find that the newspapers had 
misled us on a point not indifferent to the personal feel- 
ings of Mr. Robert Montgomery, author of the Omnipre- 
sence of the Deity, §c. &c. Mr. Montgomery has taken 
the most effectual means of satisfying us on this head: he 
has forwarded to us a copy of the baptismal register of 
Weston, Noy. 8, 1807; which proves that the story of his 
having assumed the name by which he has become 
known is utterly false and unfounded. How it originated, 
we need not inquire; but we sincerely hope never to see 
it revived again.” 
Having enjoyed the personal friendship of Mr. 
Montgomery for many years, I hope I may be 
permitted to say that he was most undeserving of 
such attacks. It has become a fashion to con- 
sider Mr. Macaulay’s satirical Essay as in some 
degree descriptive of him, but the readers of his 
works have formed a very different estimate. The 
memory of his guileless simplicity and generosity 
of character, ready wit and deep religious feeling, 
will be long cherished by his friends. 
James Daruine. 
81, Great Queen Street, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, 
Judge Creswell (2"4 S. i. 270.) — By the kind- 
ness of the intelligent and obliging librarian of 
Lincoln’s Inn, I am enabled in some degree to 
answer my own question. There is no doubt that 
the “Mr, Serjeant Creswell” of Clarendon, White- 
locke, and Sir W. Jones, is the “ Richard Cresheld” 
of Rymer and Dugdale; and that the latter is the 
correct designation, corrupted by abbreviated pro- 
nunciation to “ Creswell.” He was the represent- 
ative of the borough of Evesham in the parliaments 
of 1623-4, 1625, 1627-8, and 1640, and in the do- 
cuments referring to these elections he is named 
Richard Cresheld ; but in the list of the members 
of the latter (the Long) Parliament, given both in 
the Parliamentary History (1807), vol. ii. p. 624., 
and in Rushworth, vol. iv. p. 9., he is called, as 
member for Evesham, “ Richard Creswell, Ser- 
jeant-at-Law.” Ido not know any authority for 
the Christian name “ John,” as Mr. Woolrych 
gives it. 
He is described in the Lincoln’s Inn admission 
as the son of Edward Cresheld of Mattishall- 
Burgh, in the county of Norfolk, and his son, who 
was admitted many years later, is described as 
“William Cresheld, son and heir of Richard Cres- 
held of Evesham.” ‘These facts may enable some 
of your genealogical correspondents to favour me 
with some further account of him, the family he 
came from, the family he left behind him, and the 
date and place of his death. Epwarp Foss. 
Helmet above Crest (2"° S. i. 271.) —If such a 
practice as that to which your correspondent re- 
fers is “gaining ground,” it is a most erroneous 
one. If the helmet and crest are both to be 
shown, the crest cannot be deprived of its place 
upon the helmet; the crest was always worn on 
the top of the helmet within the wreath, or issuing 
from a coronet as the case might be, and placed 
upon the lambrequin which covered the upper 
part of the helmet. If it is intended to show 
the dignity of a baronet or knight, by placing 
the helmet above the crest, as peers place their 
coronets when the crest only (without the arms) 
is used, the principle is equally erroneous; as 
custom only appears to have made helmets signi- 
ficant of dignity, the different forms of coronets 
being regulated by royal authority for the several 
degrees of peerage. The use of side-standing 
barred helmets to denote nobility, and of open 
full-faced helmets for baronets and knights, is of 
custom only ; and not much earlier than the time 
of Charles I. When the crest is used without the 
helmet, and when not issuing from a coronet, it is - 
set upon so much of the circular wreath (which 
went round the upper part of the helmet), as in- 
dicates that ornament ; but whenever the helmet 
is used, the crest can be nowhere else than in its 
proper place upon the helmet. I have, perbaps, 
gone into a little extraneous matter in making 
these remarks; but I have done so to show that 
originally the helmet, in its various forms and 
positions, was not indicative of any rank or dignity 
in persons using it heraldically ; and (not as in 
the case of peers’ coronets), only so from custom. 
Tuos. Wn. Kine, York HERALD. 
Giving Quarter (1* S. viii. 246. 353.) — 
“ Giving Quarter. —This phrase originates from an 
agreement between the Dutch and Spaniards, that the 
ransom of an officer or soldier should be a quarter of his 
pay. Hence to beg quarter, was to offer a quarter of their 
pay for their safety, and to refuse quarter was not to ac- 
cept that composition as a ransome.” (No authority 
given.) —From Notes to assist the Memory in Various 
Sciences. 8vo. Pp.277. Murray, London, 1825., p. 112. 
Pe i 
Birmingham. 
“ Dies Dominicus” (2° S. i. 252.) — When 
your correspondent ScrutTator supposes the first 
day of the week to have received the name of 
Dies Dominicus, as being “the day of Dominus 
Sol,” he must certainly be stumbling over some 
imperfect reading of a definition given by Pro- 
copius (Comm. in Gen., c. i.) : “ Dies Dominicus, 
tanquam soli Domino consecratus,” &c. 
