246 JOURNAL OP THE PLYMOUTH INSTITUTION. 
being heiress to her father Arundell, but only to her mother Cos- 
worth ; while in another shield they are quartered as if each were 
heiress to both parents. This mode of quartering the two coats is 
decidedly objectionable, as causing confusion j but to leave out the 
arms of the father altogether is surely worse still, as that does not 
represent the descent, and is misleading. This leaves the bearing 
the paternal coat of such an heiress, either on a chief or canton, to 
be considered, and of these the canton appears least likely to cause 
confusion. 
In French armoury different quarterings, if they have such, is 
the only mark of distinction between various branches of the 
same family, and this is sometimes the case in English arms, from 
neglect of the proper mark of cadency. An instance of this 
occurs in the North and South Devon branches of a family, whose 
name will ever be held in honour and esteem by the members of 
the Plymouth Institution • namely, the family of the late Mr. Henry 
Woollcombe, f.s.a. They both have the same coat of Woollcombe 
without difference in the first and fourth quarter; the second 
quarter is also alike, the two lines being descended from two 
brothers, who married sisters, co-heirs of Pitt, of Yealmpton; in 
the third quarters the South Devon line has Stokes, through the 
marriage of John Woollcombe, of Plympton St. Mary (married 8th 
May, 1730), with Mary, daughter and co-heiress of the Rev. John 
Stokes, m.a., vicar of Tamerton Foliot, and minister of Plympton 
St. Mary ; while the North Devon line has Morth, brought in by 
the marriage of John Woollcombe, of Ashbury, Sheriff of Devon 
in 1751, with Margery, daughter and heiress of Jeffrey Morth, of 
Talland. 
