Page:Notes and Queries - Series 11 - Volume 7.djvu/121

 ns. vii. Feb. 8,1913.j NOTES AND QUERIES. 118 the same bishop Vicar of Templeport, co. Cavan ; his name was hibernicized by the natives as " Murtogh O'Cionga." The three existing titled families of the name connected with Ireland are of English or Scottish origin. Charles S. Kino, Bt. St. Leonards-on-Sca. The Family of Sir Christopher Milton (11 S. vi. 100; vii. 21).—There is an error in this interesting contribution regarding the parentage of Martha Fleetwood, wife of Thomas Milton of the Crown Office. She is stated, on the authority of the late Prof. Masson, to have been the daughter of Charles Fleetwood of Northampton. In reality she was a daughter of Sir William Fleetwood of Aldwincle, co. Northampton, and Woodstock Park, co. Oxford, Receiver of the Court of Wards, eldest surviving son of Sir Miles Fleetwood, who had held the same office. There are errors in Le Neve's ' Pedigrees of the Knights.' the Fleetwood and Churchill pedigree in ' The History of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre ' at Northampton, and Gyll's ' History of the Parish of Wraysbury.' The authority for this correction is the will of Col. William Fleetwood, which bears no date, but has a codicil dated 6 Feb., 1699/1700. He bequeaths 10s. each to his brothers Charles (of Northampton) and Gustavus (of Wandsworth, Surrey, alluded to at 9 S. xii. 130) :— "All the rest of my goods and ehattells whatso- ever I give and bequeath unto my dearly beloved sister, Mrs. Martha Milton whom I doe declare and appoint full and sole executrix of this my last Will and Testament." The testator's brother(-in-law). Dr. William Coward, benefits under the codicil. The will was proved by Martha Coward otherwise Milton, 2 March, 1699/1700 (P.C.C. Noel 46).* Sir William Fleetwood's first wife was Frances, daughter of Henry Sture; his second wife was Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Harvey. Col. William Fleetwood was a son of the first marriage. There is a doubt as to whether Martha was issue of the same marriage, but the will rather favours this inference. Charles Fleetwood of Northampton, erro- neously stated to be the father of Martha, was a son of Sir William's second marriage. Charles married Elizabeth, daughter of oi AWwincle' {Northamptonshire Notesand Queries, N.S., i. 110, etneq.). Matthew Smith. They had a son named Smith, who died unmarried in 1747. They must not be confused with General Charles Fleetwood and his son Smith. Le Neve says Sir Christopher Milton was- knighted at Whitehall, 25 April, 1686 : "Not a lawyer of much note, but being a Papist was in favour." William (not John) Webber of London is given as the father of his wife Thomasine ; she was buried in St. Nicholas's parish, Ipswich (' Pedigrees of the Knights, Harl. Soc. Visitations, viii. 402). As Le Neve is incorrect in one particular, he may be wrong in calling Thomasine's father William. Prof. Masson states that Cromwell's son-in-law, General Charles Fleetwood, was Milton's friend from their boyhood. As Bread Street (where Milton was born) and Wood Street (where Fleetwood's father had his town house) both lead into Cheap- side, they were practically neighbours, and the elder Milton's profession may have brought him into contact with Sir Miles Fleetwood, so that the assertion is probably correct. Is Masson's authority for this statement known ? R- W. B. The Wreck of the Royal Georob (11 S. vi. 110, 176, 374, 436, 496; vii. 36, 77). —The fable of the land breeze which " shook the shrouds " (whatever that may mean) of the Royal George on 29 Aug., 1782, is as tenacious of life as the most sanguine of its authors could have hoped. The fable is simply the perpetuation of the lie which was deliberately published by the Admiralty after the damning report of the court-martial which tried the survivors of the wreck was in their hands. The transition from lie to fable began when the poet Cowper, presumably in all innocence, turned the Admiralty's account of the affair into verse. The truth of the matter has long been known to students of naval history, but curiously enough neither Capt. Mahan, in Clowes's ' The Royal Navy ' (iii. 540), nor Mr. Hannay in his ' Short History ' (ii. 273), has put it clearly on record. Capt. Mahan merely quotes the fable ; Mr. Hannay adds : " But the Navy, which indeed was rarely charit- able in its judgment of the Admiralty, was of opinion that a piece fell out of her side under the strain, for she was notoriously rotten." The general public has accordingly had little opportunity of learning the truth, and it seems worth while to give it at some length. The following account is from the
 * The evidence is given more fully in 'Fleetwood