16

MEDIEVAL SEALS OF ARMS.

that a writ may be approved "be comparison of moe scales; or be other writtes sealed with the samine seale, quherof there is no suspition of falset, nor of diversitie of seales;" which failing, the controversy "may be decyded by singulare battell, because it is ane crime of falset." It was enacted, by certain Scottish statutes, that every Freeholder should have his proper seal of Arms, with which either he himself, or his attorney, was required to "compear" at the head Court of the shire, and all who failed to comply with these provisions were liable to punishment by fine.' Accordingly, it became the common practice for gentlemen to send their seals in lead to the clerk of Court, who kept them in his office for production or comparison when occasion required; and to counterfeit another man's seal was reckoned no less a crime than forgery. 'Anciently," says Nisbet, "our notaries were obliged, in transumpts of rights, to describe or blazon the seal, because it was the seal only that verified the deeds or evidents, which then were not subscribed by the granters. I have met (he adds) with several such descriptions of blazons by our notaries in transumpts, some of them awkwardly, and some handsomely done." By

66

1 Feb. 21, 1400 (Rob. III.), and 1430, 9 Parl., c. 21 (Jac. 1.)

The former of these statutes provides, "quod sigilla sint et non signeta sicut ante ista tempora fieri consuevit." In the time of Edward II. (1307-27), seals became so very common in England, that they were used not only by those who bore Arms, but others fashioned signets, on which initials, birds, flowers, etc., were en

DISUSE OF DOCUMENTARY SEALS.

17

1540, c. 117 (folio edition, c. 37), it was "statute and ordained, that because mennis seales may of adventure be tint (lost), quhair-throw great hurt may be genered to them that awe the samin: And that mennis seales may be fenzied or put to writinges after their decease, in hurt and prejudice of our Soverain Lord's lieges: That therefore na faith be given, in time cumming, to ony obligation, band, or uther writing under ane seale, without the subscription of him that awe the samin, and witnesse or else gif the partie cannot write, with the subscription of ane Notar thereto." The sealing of deeds, however, still continued necessary, and was expressly required as a solemnity by 1579, c. 80 (folio ' edition, c. 18). In 1584, it was dispensed with in the case of deeds containing a clause of registration, and shortly afterwards the practice was altogether laid aside.2

feriore parte dicti sigilli unum simplex bend, et unum bend lossyne."

1 See also 1525, c. 3. These are the earliest Scottish statutes relating to the subscription of deeds, which is now regulated by 1681, c. 5 (Car. 11).

2 See Erskine's Institute of the Law of Scotland, Book iii. Tit. 2. 27.

The continued use of Seals in the execution of English deeds forms a well-known contrast to our own modern system, and appears to harmonize with the views of Sir George Mackenzie, who quaintly observes, in the first chapter of his Science of Heraldry, that “it would be a further check upon forgers of papers that the granter's seal were to be appended;

B

for many can forge a subscription who cannot forge a seal, so that each forger behoved to associate at least another with himself, which would discourage them before the cheat, or help to discover the forgers after the cheat was perpetrated." The ordinary use of the word Signature, in reference to subscription, is rather a curious instance of a misapplication of terms. Doubtless a writer's subscription constitutes his Signum or mark, but it is equally certain that, in its original and accurate acceptation, the word signature had reference to a Seal. An interesting allusion to the joint practice of subscription and sealing occurs in the last verse of the 32d chapter of Jeremiah

18

MODERN GRANTS OF ARMS.

The preceding observations are entirely confined to the Armorial ensigns of the past, handed down from generation to generation, of which the descendants of the original bearers may feel justly proud, and to whom, not unfrequently, the ancestral shield and surname alone remain, long after the ancient stronghold has been levelled with the dust, and many a broad acre become the inheritance of strangers. And surely there is nothing either absurd or irrational in the usual desire of those who, in modern times, have become possessed of wealth and influence, by means of honest labour, to distinguish themselves and their families, by the adoption of peculiar

66

charges," from those who bear a common surname. "Several of the most powerful families of our titled aristocracy, and some even of the oldest, inherit their wealth and consequence from a clothier, a goldsmith, or a merchant of a former age, who felt as much pride in bequeathing to them the armorial bearings he had obtained from the Heralds' College, as the property accumulated by his prudence and industry. It is the peculiar boast of this Country that, almost from the foundation of the Monarchy, the ranks of her aristocracy have been thus gradually fed, and their numbers kept up, by addition of the eminent and enterprising from the general mass; so that no one has ever been so lowly in birth or station that he might not aspire, by the exercise of his talents and energies, to become the founder of a family which should eventually take rank with the direct

(B.C. 590):—“ Men shall buy fields for money, and subscribe evidences,

and seal them, and take witnesses in the land of Benjamin."

ARMS A MATTER OF LEGAL RIGHT.

19

descendants of the Knights of Battle-Abbey, or the Barons of Runnymede."1

It is not here intended, however, to defend the noble Science of Heraldry-which constitutes a portion of the history of Civilisation-from the sneers of the ignorant or from the harmless contempt of those unenviable individuals who, shutting their eyes upon the influences of the past as well as on the issues of the future, endeavour to bound their contemplations by the age in which they live. It would, moreover, be quite superfluous, as this has already been done by various learned writers. Proceeding on the simple fact that the estimation of Heraldic ensigns still continues as of old, and that, in Scotland at least, the Bearing of Coats Armorial is a matter of undoubted legal right, our main object is to endeavour to set forth the rules and principles which regulate their use and assumption.

A few short extracts from the works of acknowledged Authorities may here be introduced, in confirmation of the assertion that the use of Armorial Bearings is a matter of legal right.

66

are

"Real injuries," says Sir George Mackenzie, committed by hindering a man to use what is his own, by removing his seat out of its place in the Church, by arresting his goods unjustly, by wearing in contempt what belongs to another man as a mark of Honour, by razing shamefully a man's hair or beard, by offering to

1 Quarterly Review, vol. Ivi. p. 2. See also some very sensible observations on the vitality of Heraldry and

its adaptation to the present times in the Gentleman's Magazine for 1851, vol. xxxvi. (new ser.) pp. 295 and 515.

20

STATEMENTS OF MACKENZIE, ERSKINE, ETC.

strike him in public, or by striking him, or riving or abusing his clothes, or his house, and many other ways.

In the second chapter of his Science of Heraldry, treated as a part of the Civil Law and Law of Nations, the same Author remarks, that "by the civil law, he who bears and uses another man's Arms to his prejudice, vel in ejus scandalum et ignominiam, is to be punished arbitrarily at the discretion of the Judge; but he who usurps his Prince's Arms loses his head, and his goods are confiscated."2

Again, in the words of Erskine, "Real injuries are committed by doing whatever may either hurt one's person, as giving him a blow; or may affect his honour or dignity, as the bare aiming of a blow without striking; assuming a Coat of Arms or any mark of distinction PROPER TO ANOTHER, spitting in his face," etc.; and "this offence," he adds, "is punished arbitrarily by the Judge Ordinary, according to the circumstances attending it, either by fine or imprisonment." In like manner, to quote the language of an English writer, "between Armes and Names is a certain conformity; so that it is a thing unlawful for a man (but upon great occasion) to change his Armes or his Name.* But further, there

is between these Armes and their Bearers a kind of sympathy, or natural participation of qualities, insomuch as whoso dishonourably or unreverently useth the Armes of

1 Laws and Customs of Scotland in matters Criminal, Part i. Tit. 30. § 3. 2 In like manner, in his well-known Accedens of Armory, Gerard Legh informs us that "the law of arms

is for the most part directed and regulated by the Civil Law."

3 Institute of the Law of Scotland, Book iv. Tit. 4. § 81.

4 See, however, chap. ix.. infra.