452 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[2°d S. IX. June 9. '60. 



2. Anne, b. 1 800 ; m. J. White. She is still 

 alive, and her daughter, Mrs. Henderson, has a 

 numerous family. 



3. Mary, b. 1802 (deceased) ; m. J. H. Aucher, 

 and left a son and daughter, both married, and 

 with children — the former being in the 60th 

 Rifles. 



4. Elizabeth, b. 1803 (deceased) ; m. George 

 Archer, 64th Regt. ; and had a son (living), now 

 in the 78th Highlanders. 



5. Susan, b. 1805; d. 1859; unmarried. 



6. Alexander, d. s. p., in 63rd Regt. ; b. 1807. 



7. Louisa, b. 1809 ; m. Rev. Sam. Jackson. 

 Has issue a son, and a daughter married to an 

 officer — Mr. Hewett. 



8. Jemima, b. 1813 ; ob. inf. 



9. Henry (as above), b. 1815 ; unmarried. 



10. Jas. Handaside (as above), b. 1816 ; un- 

 married. 



11. Catherine, b. 1819; ob. inf. 



I procured these particulars from official sources, 

 and am therefore enabled to guarantee their per- 

 fect accuracy ; and although somewhat lengthy, 

 you will perhaps agree with me that their inser- 

 tion is of material consequence, where the occa- 

 sion is that of genealogical error. The baptisms 

 of the children of Alex. Edgar and Ann Gordon 

 are recorded in the parochial registers of Jamaica 

 and of Edinburgh. 



It thus appears that, on the failure of a male 

 line, the succession of nearest of kin to the last 

 Edgar of Auchingranimont would be : 



1. The son of Margaret Edgar, eldest daughter. 



2. The son of Mary Edgar, third daughter. 



3. The son of Elizabeth Edgar, fourth daughter. 



4. The son of Louisa, sixth daughter. Last, 

 not first. 



Then would follow the daughters of these 

 daughters, viz. : 



Anne, daughter of Margaret. 



Anne, daughter of Anne. 



Mary, daughter of Mary. 



Elizabeth, daughter of Louisa. Last, not first 

 in the order of succession. Spalatro. 



P. S.' — C. W. is correct in his statements re- 

 garding the Edgar family with one exception, 

 which I shall be glad to point out to him if he 

 wishes. On the death of Admiral Edgar, Thomas 

 Edgar of Glasgow was noted in the heralds' books 

 as next of kin. H. P. is entirely wrong about 

 Admiral Tait. 



I regret that I cannot give a decided answer to 

 J. H.'s question. I am not aware of any relation- 

 ship whatever between the persons to whom re- 

 ference is made. However, as the claim of 

 representation sought to be established must be 

 decided by dates and facts, not by anyone's 

 " supposition," perhaps J. H. will have the good- 

 ness to state (or, at least, give some idea), when 



and how the Edgars of Auchingrammont, in La- 

 narkshire, sprang from the Wedderlie family, in 

 Berwickshire ? C. W. 



David Wilkins (2 nd S. ix. 420.)— Whether he 

 was " a very great scoundrel," is more than I can 

 tell ; but I am inclined to believe that he never 

 was " a Lambeth Doctor." With reference to 

 the Earl's suggestion respecting the Universities, 

 I may add my belief that during the thirty years 

 between 1715 (the date of Abp. Wake's acces- 

 sion) and 1745 (the death of his "scoundrel" chap- 

 lain), there were twenty-one diplomas granted ; 

 and that all of these were received by men who 

 had taken the degree of MA. or B.D. in one of 

 our Universities. I say that I believe this to be 

 true, though there may be one or two cases in 

 which it only appears that the recipient was a 

 member (and perhaps not a graduate), and there 

 are two of whom I know nothing but their names. 

 That circumstance, however, I take to be prima 

 facie evidence that they were University men. I 

 shall be very much obliged to anyone who will 

 favour me with information respecting the early 

 history of this unfortunate Archdeacon. 



S. R. Maitland. 



Gloucester. 



Allusion in the "Rolliad" (2 ai S. ix. 342.) 

 — In the Westminster Magazine of February, 1 773, 

 vol. i. p. 157., is an article headed "Patriotic Mis- 

 fortunes, or Sir Joseph Mawbey in the Suds." Sir 

 Joseph Mawbey and Richard Wyatt, Esq., having 

 had a dispute, met at the Ordnance Arms to ex- 

 plain and be friends. Sir Joseph published an 

 account of the interview. After some preliminary 

 incivilities it states : — ~ 



"He then said, 'you are a dirty fellow.' I replied, 

 ' you are a dirty fellow.' He then made a motion with 

 his lips as if in the act of spitting. I returned it in- 

 stantb r , on which he struck at me with his fist. Not- 

 withstanding a very long indisposition, from which I am 

 not yet perfectly recovered, I gave him two or three 

 blows with effect, when unfortunately my foot slipped on 

 the carpet and I fell down. I rose, I believe, on one 

 knee : he beat me down again, and continued striking me 

 as I lay on the floor." 



The waiter came in, and some mutual friends 

 followed and separated the combatants. Sir 

 Joseph says that he offered to fight Mr. Wyatt 

 with pistols. He finishes his letter with — 



" Whilst I lay on the floor, Mr. Wyatt's nose had bled 

 over me very plentiful ; my clothes were stained much 

 with it. I lost not a drop of blood. Mr. Wyatt's face 

 was much marked." 



A wood-cut of the rudest order represents a fat 

 man on the floor, a thin one standing over him, 

 and a small waiter lifting up his hands in fright 

 and wonder. 



The Westminster Magazine has become scarce. 

 It defended the court, but attacked the opposition 



