HERALDRY. 13 



shoulder-knot has become on the modern footman a mark of 

 servitude." 



Though coats of arms beget no official recognition for 

 their bearers in this country, they are not without some weight 

 socially. A display of a coat of arms, or any of its parts, 

 cannot be considered other than a sign of one of the many 

 weaknesses of human vanity. A mistake, however, in the 

 usage of such insignia by a person w r ho can lay just claim to 

 it by inheritance is free from the charge of deception, though 

 it opens him to the criticism of ignorance regarding such 

 matters. Since the former class are barred, as the bearers of 

 false coin, it is for the latter that the following information, 

 supported by recognized authorities, is given regarding the 

 use and abuse of heraldic insignia, as applied to carriages, 

 livery and harness. 



Mr. John E. Coussans, an eminent English authority, 

 unmistakably indicates that the right is denied to display 

 coats of arms or crests on the above-mentioned parts of an 

 equipage. " They (badges) were intended to be borne on 

 military equipments, caparisons, articles of domestic use, etc." 

 In another passage the same author states : " Buttons should 

 always be of the dominant metal in the arms and charged 

 with the master's badge, not his crest. The latter belongs 

 exclusively to the bearer of the arms, servants have no right 

 whatever to them." (" Handbook of Heraldry," fourth edi- 

 tion, pages 1 33 and 333.) In further support of the argument 

 that badges, and not crests, should be used, may be quoted a 

 line from Boutell's " Heraldry," second edition, referring to 

 the Middle Ages, which reads, " Every servant carried his 

 master's badge on his arm." Again quoting Mr. Coussans : 

 " As the bearing of crests was restricted solely to their indi- 



