Page:Devon and Cornwall Queries Vol 9 1917.djvu/101

 Devon and Cornwall Notes and Queries. 75 This leaves us, as regards dedication, in exactly the old difficulty. It would appear, therefore, that the old Church was dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul. Bishop Stafford's Register is correct, but what about the statement (five years hefove the rebuilding) that the church was dedicated to St. Mary ? Can the original church of 1409, dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul, have been at some time pulled down or destroyed, and a later church erected dedicated to St. Mary ? If so, it would be this later church, dedicated to St. Mary, that was pulled down in 1787 to give place to the present church. What is the dedication of the present church ? The old tradition that it is dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul lingers, but some say that it is dedicated to St. Mary. Some time ago, a gentleman interested in the church purchased a very nice old engraving of Teigngrace Church, with the following printed below it : — " To James Templer of Stover Lodge in the County of Devon Esqre this south west view of the Parish Church of Teigngrace in the same County, is humbly inscribed by his most obedient servant. The Church, the spire of which is 140 feet high, was designed by and executed under the direction of James Templer Esq. the Patron at the joint charge of his and his brothers the Rev. John Templer the Rector and George Templer of Shopwick in the County of Somerset Esq and dedicated to the Holy Trinity in the year of our Lord 1787. Pub. April 23rd 1789 by J. Seago, Printseller High Street St Giles, London." Now our first idea is to dismiss this as perfectly absurd, but it should be noted as follows : — The engraving (and consequently this statement) is dated 1789, only two years after the rebuilding. Too soon for a mistake of that kind to be possible. Again, it is dedicated (i.e. the engraving) to the Templers who built the Church — one of whom was Rector and another Patron. It is hardly possible to suppose that some correspondence between these and "J. Seago" (the engraver or printer) did not take place, and if so, they were no doubt his authority for the statement. How can we suppose that a mistake of such a kind on their part was possible ? Can any of your readers explain the mystery ? Edward Windeatt.