Page:Notes and Queries - Series 11 - Volume 12.djvu/391

 n s. xii. NOV. 13, 1915.] NOTES AND Q CJERIES.

383

Winston's mother-in-law sister of Buc king- ham. Jane, another of Lord Boteler's daughters, married James Ley, first Earl of Maryborough, the title afterwards chosen by John Churchill. A. R. BAYLEY.

I would refer your correspondent E. F. W. to Hutchins' s ' History of Dorset,' 3rd edition, vol. iv. p. 469 et seq., where he will find a full genealogical account rather than a formal pedigree, as it is not in a tabular form of the Churchill family. The editors of this last edition of Hutchins appear, how- ever, to be somewhat sceptical as to the accuracy of this account, for in a lengthy foot-note on p. 470 they say :

" The above pedigree of the Duke of Marlborough is not registered at the College of Arms. Sir Egerton Brydges, the editor of the 6th edition of Collins's * Peerage,' considers it 'suspicious.' It has many very obvious errors, and, according to the usual calculation of the average duration of human life, it does not contain a sufficient number of generations to occupy so long a space of time. Being almost without dates, and unsupported by reference to original evidences, it calls for critical -examination." They then speak of the fact that, by special warrant from the King dated 20 Jan., 1661, Winston Churchill, of Minterne, Dorset, Esq., the father of the first Duke of Marl- borough, had a grant of a crest and aug- mentation of arms which was registered at the Heralds' College. These armorial insignia no doubt appear in the ordinary peerage books of to-day.

In this foot-note the accuracy of your correspondent's statement that John Churchill of Muston, Dorset, was the third son of William Churchill (ancestor of the Duke) by Mary Creuse would seem to be impugned.

Again at p. 471 :

" The truth is the first of the Duke of Marl borough's family from whom we can trace his descent with accuracy is John Churchill, his grand- father. .....Whether the Dorsetshire Churchills were

descended from the Norman de Courcelle or not <for we have no positive proof either way), it is

certain that a family of this name was seated in

this county at the beginning of the fifteenth century."

With regard to E. F. W.'s second inquiry as to whether Winston Churchill, father oj the Duke, had an elder brother named William, the genealogical account mentioned above seems to be against such a suggestion, as it is there stated that his father, John Churchill, who married Sarah Winston, died on 6 April, 1652, leaving Winston his son and heir. If, therefore, there was such an elder brother, he must have predeceased his father.

Winston Churchill, father of the Duke, was born at Wotton Glanville, co. Dorset : matriculated at St. John's College, Oxford, n 1636, aged sixteen ; was knighted in 1663 ; married Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Drake, of Ashe, co. Devon, Bart. ; and, dying in 1688, was buried at St. Martin's- in-the-Fields, leaving seven sons, of whom John, the first Duke of Marlborough, was the eldest surviving him. He was born at Ashe in 1650.

In the ' Index of Pedigrees ' given in Hutchins, that of Churchill is stated to be found in vol. ii. p. 415. At that reference, however, I find no such pedigree, but only a statement referring to the Churchills of Colliton, near Dorchester,to the effect that

" all the pedigrees of Churchill, Duke of Marl- borough, are extremely inaccurate, and the con- necting link between the two families has not been satisfactorily established. It is probable, how- ever, that they spring from a common ancestor. A notice of the Duke of Marlborough' s supposed descent will be found under Great Minterne."

That is the one to which I have above referred. J. S. UDAL, F.S.A.

CORAL AND ITS OWNER (US. xii. 341). Under the heading of ' Superstitious Beliefs,' Lean's c. Collectanea ' quotes the following from Swan's ' Speculum Mundi ' :

" If the wearer of it be not well it change th colour and looketh pale and dim, but increaseth to its perfectuess as the wearer of it recovereth to his health."

The West Indian negroes affirm that the colour of coral is always affected by the state of the health of the wearer, it becoming paler in disease. ARCHIBALD SPARKE, F.R.S.L.

When I was a lad, coral necklaces and coral " long drop " earrings were de rigueur among the denizens of the East End, and were worn as monitors of health always. " How pale your necklace is ! " was a re- minder by some interested friend that the wearer's condition in that respect was not of the best possible. The explanation seems to be that coral, being a porous kind of stone, less hard than carnelian or jet or jade, would naturally absorb the skin emanations, and gradually change colour if these were of a sickly nature. M. L. B. BRESLAB.

NAPOLEON'S BEQUEST TO CANTTLLON (11 S. xii. 139, 188, 324). May I thank the contri- butors who have so kindly replied to my original query ?

From the reply at the last reference it appears that 'The'Encyclopaedia of Heraldry ' recognizes two Irish families named Cantilion, and one named Cantilon.