from the work in the middle of his career, would have been a matter much to be regretted. Mr. Hargrave published in numbers, and continued as far as p. 380, not quite half the book; the reft, to the end of page 786, was added, under the care of Mr. Butler. Soon after the publication of the firft number, Mr.. Hargrave was favoured by the prefent Earl of Hardwicke (a nobleman at all times the friend of science), with the manufcript notes of Lord Chief Juftice Hale. With these valuable remains he has enriched this edition. The notes of that great lawyer were numerous, as far as the chapter of Knights Service, but after that, few and fcanty. The Public are obliged to Mr. Hargrave for the beauty and elegance of the whole edition. The text of Littleton, and the commentary, have the reputation of being correctly printed. The references have been carefully examined, and former errors are rectified in this edition.

To Sir Edward Coke's obfervations Mr. Hargrave has added a great variety of useful and valuable Notes. Of thefe we cannot give fo full an account as their merit seems to deferve: the attempt would carry us beyond our limits. We fhall, however, felect the note on the office of Lord High Conftable, as it contains fome curious matter relative to the laws and antiquities of the kingdom.

It may be neceffary shortly to ftate, that there was formerly, in this country, a court of chivalry, held before the Lord High Conftable and Earl Marshal of England. In times of pure chivalry, fays Sir William Blackftone, this court was in great reputation. By the Statute 13 Rich. II. c. 2. it had cognizance of contracts touching deeds of arms and war, as well out of the realm as in it. When held before the Earl Marshal only, it was a military court, or court of honour; when before the Lord High Conftable and the Earl Marthal jointly, it was a criminal court. By the common law, if a man were wounded on the high sea, and died in a foreign land, no enquiry.could be made, because it was not within any of the counties of the realm: but by a Statute of Rich. II. the fame was determinable before the Lord High Conftable and Earl Marshal. (See the 2 Geo. II. c. 21.) This court is now entirely out of ufe. The train of events that occafioned the extinguifhment of a jurifdiction, at one time fo important, will appear in the following note, which we shall give in the words of Mr. Hargrave, though fomewhat abridged, for the fake of keeping within the bounds prefcribed to us by the nature of our publication.

The office of High Conftable became extinct in the reign of Henry the Eighth, by the attainder of Stafford Duke of Buckingham, in whom it was hereditary; and fince his death, there hath not been any permanent High Conflable, the practice having uniformly been to keep the office vacant, except on particular occaficns. In,

onfequence of this, it hath frequently been a fubject of troverfy, whether, during the vacancy of the office of High Constable, the jurifdiction incident to the Court of Chivalry can be exercifed by the Earl Marshal only. Lord Coke's manner of ftating Sir Francis Drake's cafe, imports, that an appeal could not be profecuted against him for want of a High Conftable; and Dr. Duck, in his excellent treatife on the ufe and authority of the civil law, fays that the Judges being confulted by Elizabeth were of that opinion. Duck, lib. 2. cap. 8. pars 3. f. 16. In the reign of Charles the First the Lord Keeper and Judges of the King's Bench were advised with on a like occafion, and held, that the Earl Marshal could not take an appeal without a High Constable; and accordingly the King appointed the Earl of Lindsey twice to the office; once to try an appeal by Lord Rea against Mr. Ramfay, for treafon committed in Germany; and a fecond time, to try an appeal by the widow of William Wife, against William Holmes, for the murder of her hufband in the island of Terra Nova, in America. See Rufhw. vol. ii. p. 106. 112. and Duck, ubi fupra. Hitherto, only the right of the Earl Marshal to criminal judicature had been denied; but in 1640 the House of Commons went further; for they refolved, that the Earl Marshal can make no court without the Conftable. See Ruthw vol. iii. p. 1056. However, notwithstanding this declaration of the law by the House of Commons, the Court of King's Bench, foon after the Reftoration, diftinguished between the feveral branches of jurifdiction belonging to the Court of Chivalry, and held, that as to matters relative to arms and honour, the court may be before the Earl Marthal only; but as to matters of ordinary juftice touching life and limb, there must be a High Conftable, as well as an Earl Marshal. 1 Lev. 230. But in a fubfequent cafe before the House of Lords, the counfel, arguing against the Earl Marshal, infifted, generally, that by himself he could not hold any court; though it doth not appear from the printed report whether the judgment, which was there given against the jurifdiction of the Earl Marshal, was founded on that propofition, or on the other points of the caufe. Such is the ftate of the authorities against the judicature of the Earl Marshal without a High Conftable. See Dr. Oldis's Cafe, Show. Parliam. Caf. 58. On the other hand, many ftrong arguments, drawn from the practice immediately after the attainder of the last hereditary High Conftable, down to the latter end of the reign of James the First, as well as from the opinions of judges and others of high name, have been urged in its favour. Thefe are well digefted in a letter, written foon after the Revolution, by Dr. Plott, to Lord Somers, while he was Attorney General, and appear to have been collected by his defire. See Hearn, Difc. of Emin. Antiq. 2d edit. vol. ii. p. 250. One authority much relied on by Dr. Plott, is an opinion of the Lord Keeper, the Mafter of the Rolls, and a great number of the Privy Council, in the 20th of James the First; who, after a folemn hearing declared, that the Earl Marshal had all the powers of judicature, without the High Conftable, during the vacancy of that office. On report of this to the King, he iffued his commiffion, under the Great Seal, to Thomas Earl of Arundel then Earl Marshal, which, after reciting that the Earl Marshal had delayed to proceed in fome caufes REV. March, 1788.

before

before him on account of doubts of his authority, contains a strong declaration, that the judicial power of the Earl Marshal extends to all caufes whatsoever, of which the court of the Constable and Marshal ought properly to take cognisance, without one exception. How it happened, that fo foon after this folemn hearing and declaration concerning the Earl Marshal, the Lord Keeper and Judges of the King's Bench fhould advise the King that Lord Rea's appeal could not be taken without a High Conftable, feems very extraordinary and unaccountable. We are not now poffeffed of the reasons affigned for the opinion thus given to the Crown; and on the other hand, the fame want of information leffens its weight and authority. As to the mode of trial in the cafe of appeals in the Court of Chivalry, fome have apprehended, that it is ever by duel, if the party appealed elects that mode, and the appellant is not privileged from the due! by age or profeffion. But this, though it may be very true in respect to appeals in the courts of common law, is a mistaken notion as to appeals in the court military; for there duel is only the ultimate trial; and never reforted to unless there is a want of fufficient teftimony to prove the offence, and even then it is faid to be in the difcretion of the court to grant or refufe the duel. See Rushw. vol. iii. p. 113. In Lord Rea's appeal against Ramfey in the 7 Cha. I. being the laft in which the duel was directed, the day of combat was prorogued; and in the mean time the King fignifying his defire of nor having the affair decided by duel, the court met and committed both the appellant and appellee, till they fhould give fecurity, to the fatisfaction of the King, not to attempt any thing against each other. The court was immediately afterwards diffolved by a revocation of the commiffion, which had been granted for trial of the appeal. Rufhw. vol. iii. p. 127. The criminal jurisdiction of the Court of Chivalry hath long been in a dormant ftate, and is likely to continue in it. It must not, however, be taken for granted, that this court is the only jurifdiction for trial of crimes committed in foreign countries, or that without reforting to it, there would be an abfolute defect of justice in the cafe of all fuch crimes. For, ift, the 33d of Hen. VIII. c. 23. provides that treafon, mifprifion of treafon, and murder, in whatever place committed, whether within the King's dominions or without, fhall be triable before Commiffioners of oyer and terminer to be appointed for that purpose: and this ftatute, we are told, ftands unrepealed as to murder, and hath accordingly been fometimes put into ufe. 2d, As to treafons and mifprision of treafon, committed out of the realm, they, by the 35 Hen. VIII. c. 2. are triable either before the King's Bench, or Commiffioners. See 1 Hal. Hift. Pl. c. 283.'

Having been drawn by the variety of matter into a confiderable length, we find ourfelves obliged to defer our account of Mr. Butler's fhare of the work to another opportunity.

[To be continued.]

ART.

ART. VIII. Supplement to the Antiquities of England and Wales. By Francis Grofe, Efq. Vol. II.

Hooper.

THE

Super-royal 4to.

41. 135.

HE volume before us concludes Mr. Grofe's celebrated Antiquities of England and Wales. Each volume of this elegant and valuable work has been noticed in our Journal *, at the time of its publication. Our Readers muft, we apprehend, from our former accounts, be fo well acquainted with the nature and plan of the undertaking, that little more now remains for us to obferve, on this fubject, than barely to recite the contents of this 2d volume of Supplement.

In his addrefs to the Public, the Author acknowledges, with the profoundeft gratitude,' the many indulgences which he has experienced from the encouragers of the work, and returns his * moft hearty thanks' for the affiftance which his friends have given him, in furnishing drawings and defcriptions of several places that are introduced into the work. He hopes that he has fulfilled a promife which he formerly made, that the engravings of this Supplement fhould be better executed than those in the preceding volumes. This he has certainly done, for the plates are obviously fuperior to thofe which we formerly mentioned with dae approbation.

The Preface has received much improvement, or rather, many additions, under the title of Addenda to the Preface. Among these there is a valuable treatise on Monuments, and another on Fonts. They conftitute a confiderable part of the ecclefiaftical antiquities of this kingdom; and a defcription of the feveral kinds of them is a very proper addition to Capt. Grofe's learned Preface, which may very juftly be ftyled An Introduction to the general Study of British Antiquities. In thefe inveftigations, the Author does not carry his enquiries farther back than the Conqueft, nor lower down than to the end of the laft century. He defcribes the different forms of monuments, their ornaments, and the manner of writing the epitaphs on them in different ages; the chief defign of his obfervations being to afcertain the time of their erection, and the perfons whofe memory they were intended to perpetuate, and thus render the knowledge of antiquities fubfervient to the ftudy of hiftory. These investigations will appear the more neceffary, when it is confidered, that the earliest monuments had feldom any written infcription, but were for the moft part ornamented with fome engraved or fculptured device, declaratory of the deceased's dignity, employment, &c. and even after the ufe of infcriptions was introduced, dates were frequently omitted; fo that the time must be gueffed at, from

*See Monthly Review, vol. xlix. p. 378.; lii 233.; Iv. 199 and 203.; lxxv. 370.

Q 2

either

either the ftructure of the tomb,-its ornaments,-the form of the letters, and the language of the infcriptions when such occur, or the drefs and posture of the figures which are either engraved, fculptured, or painted, &c. Thus the Author lays down general rules for directing the hiftorical antiquary, not only to make proper obfervations on the monumental antiquities with which he may meet, but also to form right conclufions concerning them. After giving a general defcription of monuments of different ages, our learned antiquary thinks much affiftance may be drawn from the following circumstances:

Those monuments ornamented with circular and interfecting arches, are of greater antiquity than thofe having pointed ones, defcribed by the interfection of two circles: and thefe are more ancient than thofe low pointed arches defcribed from four centers; the latter being scarcely older than the reign of King Henry VII. '

In figures of armed knights, thofe with the mail armour and cylindrical helmets flat at the top, are always older than those with plate armour and a head-piece having a vifor and bever. The radiating hair curling inwards towards the head, is a mark of a monument of the 13th or the 14th century.

The female head dress of that period was the tiara or mitre-like cap. The Lady Fitzwalter, in little Dunmow-church, and a lady of Chidiok, in Christ Church, Hants, both have this kind of coifeure.

A monument adorned with armorial bearings cannot be older than the latter end of the eleventh century, as arms were not used in England before that period, Mr. Gale fays, not before the year 1147; Mr. Edmonfon places the introduction of them before the commencement of the tenth century; the medium as ftated above may perhaps be nearer the truth than either.

The first inftance of quartering arms by any fubject, was given by John Haftings, Earl of Pembroke, following the example of King Edward III. Therefore monuments adorned with different quarterings must be pofterior to that period.

Monuments with fupporters to coats of arms, mark them to have been erected fince the time of King Richard II. that prince being the first who used them.

Till the time of Henry III. the heads of the peers were not adorned with coronets. John of Eltham, fecond fon of King Edward II. who died A. D. 1334, and is buried in Westminster Abbey, has on a coronet with leaves, and is the most ancient of its kind.

Where the arms of France contain only three fleurs de lis, or lillies, the monument has been erected fince the reign of King Henry V.; before that time they were femeé with thofe flowers.

Those monuments on which the heads of the cumbent figures are fupported by two pillows, are prior to the 16th century, after that period, mats were reprefented as used for that purpose.'

Such are the Author's general obfervations. Were we to proceed with even an abstract of his account of the different kinds of monumental architecture: ufed at different times, we should much