to their crimes. His son-in-law, who accompanied him, fell a sacrifice to his bravery and affection for the Baron, whom he defended to the last; and it was not till deserted by all his attendants, and overpowered by the assassins, that he gave up the contest. Such heroic courage merits this brief record. This transaction, however, was the cause of the extirpation of the whole gang: the most rigorous justice ensued; many were executed; the rest fled, and never returned. They were distinguished by the titles of Gwylaid y Ducoed (The Bandilli of the Black Wood); and Gwylaid Cochion Mowddwy (The Red-headed Banditti of Mowddwy). Sir Howell y Fwyall. I transcribe from Bingley's "North Wales," the following account of this gallant knight: "Sir Howell y Fwyall, a native of the parish of Llanstyndwy, in Caernarvonshire, and a descendant from Colwyn ap Tangno, one of the fifteen tribes of North Wales, was Constable of Cricceith Castle. This valiant officer attended the Black Prince in the battle of Poictiers, where, although on foot, and armed only with a battle-axe, he performed several acts of the utmost bravery and heroism. The principal of his services was the cutting off the head of the French King's horse, and taking him (the King be it understood) prisoner. As a recompence for his valour, he received the honour of knighthood, and was allowed to bear the arms of France, with a "battleaxe in bend sinister ;" and to add to his name Y Fwyall, the battle axe. In further commemoration of his services, it was ordered, that a mess of meat should, at the expence of the Crown, be every day served up before the axe with which he had done these wonderful feats. This mess, after it had been brought to the knight, was taken down and distributed among the poor. Even after Sir Howell's death, the mess continued to be served as usual, and, for the sake of his soul, given to the poor, till so lately as the beginning of the reign of Queen Elizabeth. Eight yeomen attendants, called yeomen of the Crown, were appointed to guard it, who received eight pence a day, constant wages." Resemblance between Scottish and Welsh Customs. There is a great similarity between the manners of the Scotch High landers and the mountaineers of North Wales. I shall particularize one corresponding trait. It was formerly customary in Wales for the lord to dine with his vassals and dependants, in the same manner as the Highland chieftain entertained his clan.* At Mostyn Hall, the seat of the family of that name, in Flintshire, the "great gloomy hall," as Pennant styles it, is still extant: it is furnished with a Dais, an elevation at the upper end, where the lord himself sat and presided; and down the sides are tables for the humbler guests. Its walls are appropriately decorated with the spoils of the chace,and with military accoutrements, among which are swords, guns, pikes, helmets, and breastplates. Pennant informs us that, "to this day (1796) the similitude of old times is kept up when the family is at home. The head-servants take their dinner at the Dais, and the numerous inferior servants fill the long table. The roof is lofty," he continues, "and crossed with long beams. The nen-bren, or top-beam, was in all times a frequent toast whenever the master's health was drank; and lâched y nen-bren y ty+ was the cordial phrase." This toast is still given at dinner parties in the counties of Caernarvon, Merioneth, and Flint. T. R. "16 June, 1 Eliz. (1559) A circular Letter was sent to all Sheriffs, respecting complaints made by them of the great expences they were at for the Judges in their circuits. A letter addressed to the Sheriff of Surrey (signed by the Queen) states, that "in this last Session of Parlt the complaint had been made, & sute made in this our last Parit for remedy, wch was not thought reasonable for some respects to pass in that manner as it was mentioned, but that some other order might be taken for the same. We signify to you and other Sheriffs that since this is the first year of our entry to the state of the Crown, having so many great things in hand, we cannot conveniently resolve on any alteration in that matter this year, we require you to proceed for the provision of the Justices of assize in like manner as before, and we shall not forget your good service herein, as soon as we may conveniently cause some good order to be taken, & for the exoneration of your great charge." (From a Copy.) "21 Feb. 1573. "After or hartie comendacions, Wher of longe tyme many ge'tlemen, some eligible to be Sheriffes, some yt have been in office in ye moste P'te of the Counties of this Realme, haue both in Pliament & other plac complayned of y⚫ gret burthen and charge susteyned in ye said office of Sheriffwick by reason as they have alledged of ye large dietts & other charges of the Justic of assize and gaole deliv'y yerely encresing in such sorte as many gentlme' very meete for yt office in respect of theire wisdom & dexterity to execute y⚫ same, thoughe not so meete for welth to beare the charge of the expenc have of late yeres made most earnest sute to be forborne onely for want of welth to bere ye burden. The Queenes Matie callinge this cause now of late unto her remembraunce hath thought yt very necessarye to cause y' same to be considered by her councell & remedye to be P'vided therefore as the cause maye bee yt in the consideracion hereof yt ys by her Matie & us of her councell well P'ceived yt by the petition of div the Shereffes in sondrie Counties apperinge by y exchequer for allowance for the dietts & other charges of the said Justic the same are yerely growen more & more in charges to the said Shereffes, and consequently her Matie thereby more charged then by reason ought to be allowed. And therefore to remedye this matt yt ys determyned by her Matie wh th' advice of us of her prvye councell, yt the Sheriffes shall not after this Lent assizes have the charge of the Justics of the assizes dietts but that the said Justic shall have of her Matie out of her cofers sev'all somes of money for the daielye dyetts duringe the tyme that heretofore the Sheriffes have byn chargeablye wtall wthin theire Counties with wch determinac'on the more P'te of the said Justic have byn by div of her Mats councell made acquainted. And herof we have thought it convenient to give knowledge as we do the like to other Sheriffes in the Realme to th'intent yt yt maie af. this Lent assizes forbeare to enter into suche farther chargs and yt yt is ment yt ye shall against the Sommer assizes by ye authority of yor office aide and assist the seruants of the said Justices yt shall require yor advice for helpe to make P'vision for yor maisters dietts and for lodginge and horse corne at as reasonable charges as maye and ought to be for her Maties s'vice and as reason. requireth that the said Justic in respect of theire paynefull and carefull service for administrac'on of Justice should be both honorably and favorably used in all things requisit for theire owne P'sons and trayne whereof we trust both you as Sheriffs now beinge and all other succeedynge you will have care and due regard. Fynally we also warne yow yt now when yow shalbe unburthened thereof as of a matts of longe tyme complayned yew do not for yr p'vat respect ent into anie such, unnecessary charge as hath not in former tymes of the kyng her Mates father and other her, P'genitors byn used nor allowed, for it is not ment to geve yow allowancs hereaftr of anie thinge upon yor accoumpt that shall not be well warranted to be allowed unto yow. We also have given knowledge to the Justice yt yt shalbe very convenient yt at theire first comynge to the places appoynted for the Sessions they do begyne to here and determyn ye causes of the p'soners in yor charge so far forth as yt maie be conveniently done to P'cede to delivery of the gaole before they Pcede to the assizes whereby that attendance of the multy tude of the Justice of peace shall not nede to be so longe as yf the Gaole deliv'y should be last. And therefore we will yt yew do so make redye yor gaole and prisoners that the Justic maie fyrst fyneshe that service being the principall cause of the Sessions. And so bide yew right hartely fair well. "From Hampton Courte the xxith of February 1573 "Yor lovinge frendes "P'script yt "For the next assizes yt shall suffise yow make P'vision of two messes well furnished & yf ovr and besides this yow shall demande any further allowance for y Justices dietts yt ys not ment yt yew shall have anie allowance for the same afterwards yew see what order yt hath pleased her Matie to take therein." "N. Bacon C. S. W. Burghley. E. Lincoln. P. Sussex. A. Warwick. Bedford. R. Leycester. N. Knolles. T. Smyth. F. Wallsingh'm. R. Sandler. W. Mildmay." and "abstruse" point, therefore, started by Z. A. (p. 508), does not seem to be one which could be expected to be noticed in a Letter of the above description; nor indeed has it, in my opinion, any connexion with the subject-matter of such Letter, as it certainly could not, by any possibility, fall within the province of a Surrogate to inquire whether certain marriages solemnized long since, and legalized (or intended so to be) by certain Acts of Parliament passed for the purpose, could, under the construction of such Acts, be deemed legal or not. The caution given a Surrogate in the Letter, as to making inquiries relative to the competency of a Church, or Chapel, where a marriage is wished to be had, to have such a ceremony solemnized therein, is most assuredly highly necessary and proper; and to this single point, I conceive, Mr. Hardy's remarks extend. As the point of law alluded to by your correspondent Z. A. is evidently stated incidentally, it forms no part of the general subject of the Letter. But as to the point itself, as far as my humble opinion goes, should conceive the marriages solemnized under the circumstances stated by your correspondent, to be legal. Of this opinion Professor Christian is, evidently; as, ou referring to his Notes to Blackstone, vol. ii. p. 439,* he expressly asserts their legality, but joins with every sensible man in lamenting the limited effects of the Acts passed on the subject. So Mr. Fraser, in his new Edition of Burn's Ecclesiastical Law, vol. ii. p. 478, clearly views the matter in the same light, as he raises no question as to the validity of the marriages which had been solemnized before 1st August, 1781, in Churches or Chapels erected since 26 G.II.; but the very important, and, in my opinion, only question, which can be raised on the point, how far the word "usually," as expressed in the Act of the 26 G. II. shall be construed as extending? Mr. Frazer's Note is this: “This Act (viz. 21 G. III. c. 53) relates only to Marriages solemnized in Churches Upon comparison, I perceive, that Mr. Hardy has adopted, with little or no variation, Judge Christian's note, in the extract given by you in p. 236, and observed upon by Z. A. or Public Chapels erected since the Marriage Act of the 26 G. II. Such as bad been erected a longer or shorter time before, are not provided for by this remedial law. As to these, the matter is still left open, which includes in it this important question, How far the word "usually” (as used in the 26 G. II.) shall be understood to extend ?" From this it is clear, the learned Commentator had no doubt as to the legality of the Marriages coming within the purview of the Act of the 21 G. III. Indeed, I cannot suppose, that the Courts would annul a Marriage for want of a proper transmission of its Register, agreeably to a concluding clause of an Act, which does not expressly make the non-transmission fatal to the validity of the Marriage. The parties, whose duty it was to transmit the Registers, might, perhaps, have been punished (vide Burn's Eccl. Law, p. 464, tit. Marriage) for a non-compliance with validity of the Marriage would not be the clause, but I should apprehend the affected. Besides, the law, I appre heud, always concludes that the requisites of an Act are complied with, until the contrary is proved; and therefore, in alluding to the Margentlemen are quite justified in stating riages in question, I think professional that such Marriages were legalized by the Act in question, since they have requisite was complied with. no business to presume but that every ported the case of the King v. InbaMr. Sylvester Douglas, (who rebitants of Northfield, which gave rise that famous case, evidently coincided to the stat. 21 G. III.) in his Notes to celebrated Civilian, now no more, and in the opinions here quoted, as did a once the bosom friend of SENEX CLERICUS ANGLICANUS, and formerly a Surrogate. |