No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 31 July 2008
In 1953 a number of parishes throughout England wished to commemorate the accession and coronation of Her Majesty the Queen by placing representations of the royal arms in their churches. As the introduction of such devices into churches may only be made with the authority of a faculty from the diocesan consistory court, a number of these petitions came to be considered judicially. Two judgments were reported.
2 Re St Paul, Battersea, [1954] 1 WLR 920Google Scholar. Southwark Consistory Court; and Re West Tarring Parish Church [1954] 2 All ER 591Google Scholar. [1954] 1 WLR 923n. Chichester Consistory Court.
3 Bishopwearmouth (Rector & Churchwardens.) v Adey [1958] 3 All ER 441, sub nom Re St Michael and All Angels. Bishopwearmouth [1958] 1 WLR 1183. Cons Ct.
4 St Nicholas, Plumstead Re (Rector & Churchwardens) [1961] 1 All ER 298Google Scholar. [1961] 1 WLR 916. Cons Ct.
5 It is clear that such matters are not to be delegated to the archdeacons: see the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules 1992. SI 1992/2882. r 6, App A. which covers inter alia ‘external or internal decoration or redecoration except where in the opinion of the [diocesan] advisory committee it will result in a material alteration either externally or internally to the appearance of the church’ (App A, para 1 (iii), and repairs to movables (using matching materials) not including Royal Coat of Arms, unfixed hatchments, heraldic achievements, paintings, historic textiles, historic silver and base metal work' (App A, para 3 (ii)).
6 Re St Paul. Battersea [1954] 2 All ER 595Google Scholar. [1954] 1 WLR 920. Cons Ct; Re West Tarring Parish Church [1954] 2 All ER 591Google Scholar. [1954] 1 WLR 923n. Cons Ct.
7 The Law of Arms is regarded as a part of the laws of England, and the common law courts, and ecclesiastical courts, will take judicial notice of it as such: Paston v Ledhum (1459) YB 37 Hen VI. Pasch p 18 per Nedham J.
8 [1955] P 133. [1955] 1 All ER 387. High Ct of Chivalry.
9 [1954] 2 All ER 591. [1954]1 WLR 923n. Cons Ct.
10 [1954] 2 All ER 595. [1954] 1 WLR 920, Cons Ct.
11 [1954] 2 All ER 595 at 596. [1954] I WLR 920 at 921 per Garth Moore Ch. The circular (as quoted by Macmorran, Ch in Re West Tarring Parish Church [1954] 2 All ER 591 at 591, 592Google Scholar. [1954] 1 WLR 923n at 924. Cons Ct) stated that: ‘An instance has recently come to our notice of the reproduction of the royal arms in a new stained glass window in a church, and we have reason to believe that the position regarding the reproduction of the arms and other royal emblems may not be fully appreciated. The position is that the royal arms, the royal crown and the royal cypher are the personal emblems of the Sovereign and may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without the Queen’
12 Re Si Paul, Battersea [1954] 2 All ER 595 at 596Google Scholar. [1954] I WLR 920 at 921. Cons Ct. per Garth Moore Ch.
13 [1954] 2 All ER 595 at 596. [1954] 1 WLR 920 at 921. per Garth Moore Ch.
14 These are variously styled coat armour, armorial bearings, arms, or coats of arms. They are by nature a form of personal insignia. Although their original function was to enable knights to identify one another on the battlefield, they soon acquired wider, more decorative uses. They are still widely used by countries, public and private institutions and by individuals.
15 Manchester Corpn v Manchester Palace of Varieties Ltd [1955] P 133; [1955] 1 All ER 387. High Ct of Chivalry, per Lord Goddard, Surrogate. As early as Scroop v Grosvenor (1389) Calendar of Close Rolls. Ric 11. vol 3. p 586 it was established that a man could have obtained at that time a definite right to his arms, and that this right could be enforced against another.
16 R v Parker (1668) 1 Sid 352, 82 ER 1151. sub nom Parker's Case 1 Lev 230.
17 Manchester Corpn v Manchester Palace of Varieties Ltd [1955] P 133. ] 1 All ER 387. High Ct of Chivalry, per Lord Goddard. Surrogate.
18 Duke of Buckingham's Case (1514) 3 Dyer 285b, Keil 170, 72 ER 346.
19 Earl Cowley v Countess of Cowley [1901] AC 450. HL.
20 Bishop of Exeter v Marshall (1865) LR 3 HL 17.
21 Scroop v Grosvenor (1389) Calendar of Close Rolls, Ric 11, vol 3, p 586. The High Court of Chivalry is the subject of a chapter by SirCoke, Edward. Coke upon Littleton (New York: Garland Publishing Inc. 1979) vol 4 chap 17Google Scholar. See also Squibb, G.D., The High Court of Chivalry, a Study of the Civil Law of England (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959)Google Scholar
22 Putyman v Cavendish (1397) Close Rolls 21 Ric 11 p 1 m 5. The opinion among lawyers is good evidence of what the law is: Isherwood v Oldknow (1815) 3 M & S 382 at 396, 397, 105 ER 654, per Lord Ellenborough. applied in Manchester Corpn v Manchester Palace of Varieties Ltd [1955] P 133. [1955] 1 All ER 387 at 393, High Ct of Chivalry, per Lord Goddard, Surrogate.
23 Cases were tried secundum legem et consuetudinem curiae nostrae militaris: Puryman v Cavendish (1397) Close Rolls 21 Ric II p 1 m 5. This was recognised by the common law courts: Paston v Ledham (1459) YB 37 Hen VI, Pasch p 18, per Nedham J.
24 They were generally described as tesserae gentilitatis or insignia of gentility.
25 De Donis Conditionalibus (13 Edw 1, st 1).
26 Re Rivett-Carnac's will (1885) 30 ChD 136.
27 Particularly meaning those who are specified in the words of the grant.
28 For a discussion of corporeal and incorporeal property see an article by the author in (1997) 17 New Zealand Universities Law Review 379–401.
29 Arms descend with due and proper differencing, to male descendants of the grantee in the first instance, and through females as heraldic heiresses in the event of the failure of the male line, as quarterings: Wiltes Peerage Case (1869) LR 4 H L, 126 at 153.Google Scholar
30 See eg the Settled Land Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo 5, c 18) s 67, replacing Settled Land Act 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c 38), s 37.
31 SirMegarry, Robert and SirWade, Henry. The Law of Real Property (4th edn). ed Thompson, M.P. (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1975), p 788, note 6.Google Scholar
32 For other types, found in England, see Megarry, and Wade, , A Manual of the Law of Real Property (4th edn), p 789Google Scholar. ‘Land’ includes manor, advowson, rent, and other incorporeal hereditaments: real property which, on an intestacy might, before 1st January 1926, have devolved on an heir: Law of Property Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo 5, c 20), s 205(1).
33 Manchester Corpn v Manchester Palace of Varieties Ltd [1955] P 133. [1955] 1 All ER 387. High Ct of Chivalry.
34 Re St Paul, Battersea [1954] 2 All ER 595 at 596. [1954] 1 WLR 920 at 921, Cons Ct. per Garth Moore Ch.
35 Manchester Corpn v Manchester Palace of Varieties Ltd [1955] P 133. [1955] 1 All ER 387. was the first sitting of the High Court of Chivalry since 1737. For the last cases heard before then, see Squibb, . The High Court of Chivalry pp 107–117.Google Scholar
36 Re St Paul, Battersea [1954] 2 All ER 595 at 596. [1954] 1 WLR 920 at 922, Cons Ct. per Garth Moore Ch.
37 Re West Tarring Parish Church [1954] 2 All ER 591Google Scholar. [1954] 1 WLR 923n, Cons Ct.
38 [1954] 2 All ER 591 at 592. [1954] 1 WLR 923n at 924, per Macmorran Ch, quoting the Home Office letter of 29 May 1954.
39 [1954] 2 All ER 591 at 592. [1954] 1 WLR 923n at 924.
40 In 1660 an Act of Parliament required the royal arms to replace any example of the arms of the Commonwealth in churches, but there was no requirement for the use of the royal arms where they were not previously displayed.
41 Re St Paul, Battersea [1954] 2 All ER 595 at 596Google Scholar. [1954] 1 WLR 920 at 922, Cons Ct.
42 Act of Supremacy 1534 (26 Hen 8, c 1), repealed by the See of Rome Act 1554 (1 & 2 Php & M, c 8), and the repeal confirmed by the Act of Supremacy 1558 (I Eliz 1, c 1), s 4.
43 Act of Supremacy 1558 (1 Eliz 1, c 1), ss 8, 9.
44 Articles of Religion, art XXXVII. ‘Of the Civil Magistrate’: ‘The King's Majesty hath the chief power in this Realm of England, and other his Dominions, unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm, whether they be Ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign Jurisdiction.
‘Where we attribute to the King's Majesty the chief government, by which Titles we understand the minds of some slanderous folks to be offended: we give not to our Prince the ministering either of God's Word, or of the Sacraments, the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify; but only that prerogative, which we see to have been given always to all godly princes in holy Scriptures by God himself; that is, that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evildoers[…]’.
45 Re St Paul, Battersea [1954] 2 All ER 595Google Scholar at 597. [1954] 1 WLR 920 at 922, Cons Ct.
46 [1954] 2 All ER 595 at 597. [1954] 1 WLR 920 at 923.
47 [1954] 2 All ER 595 at 597. [1954] 1 WLR 920 at 923.
48 Its use at sea is of course, subject to greater restrictions.
49 Re St Paul, Battersea [1954] 2 All ER 595Google Scholar. [1954] 1 WLR 920, Cons Ct.
50 Re West Tarring Parish Church [1954] 2 All ER 591Google Scholar. [1954] 1 WLR 923n, Cons Ct.
51 Re St Paul, Battersea [1954] 2 All ER 595Google Scholar at 596, [1954] 1 WLR 920 at 922, Cons Ct.
You have
Access