Page:Notes and Queries - Series 9 - Volume 7.djvu/441

 vii. JUNE i,i90i.] NOTES AND QUERIES.

433

instances in which the same two forms are required for perspicuity. On the other hand, the "practical utility" of the single- word form " anyone " is non-existent. " Any one " is proper for all uses, and the editors of the 'H.E.D.' agree with rne (see their articles on the analogy of "anybody" and "anything" that has led to the form "anyone." The analogy, however, is defective. " One," as I said, is not on all fours with "body," because, while the latter admits of composition with all the four particles " any," " every," " some," and " no," only the first three appear in union with " one " ; hence the abominable incon-
 * Any one ' and 'Every one'). It is undoubtedly

it," "Any one of them could do it," and, speaking e.g. of books, " Any one would suit me." The phrase "any one particle" need not be regarded, being pleonastic for "any particle." Why these distinctions of " anyone " for persons indefinitely, and of "any one" for persons definitely and things 1 And if we are to have " anyone," &c., why not " eachone," as in the olden time 1 F. ADAMS.

DETACHED SHEET (3 rd S. vi. 266 ; 9 th S. vii. 11, 295). The list of the editions of Little- ton's dictionary given at the last reference is not complete. I have a copy dated MDCXCIII.

C. C. B.

"CRONG" (9 th S. vii. 346). There is little doubt as to the meaning of this word in the quotations. It is a muck-fork (Halliwell), or dung-fork, having the tines bent at right angles to the haft, to enable the manure to be pulled out over the tail of the cart into small heaps, in a row, which are afterwards spread with a fork. As to the etymology, the word is possibly nothing but a jumble of " crook " and " prong." H. P. L.

When living in New Zealand in a neigh- bourhood where the greater number of my fellow-settlers were Scotch, I used to hear this word applied to a four-pronged imple- ment like a potato fork, bent near the joining of the prongs and with a straight handle, used for dragging manure out of a cart.

THOMAS AWDRY.

This would probably be a "dung-hook," an implement standing in the same relation to the dung or pitch fork as the ordinary garden hoe does to the Dutch hoe, i.e., with tines or prongs bent down towards the handle instead of standing away from and nearly in a line with it. " Crong " or " cronge " would probably be the same word as "crank" or

"cranke," and so applicable to anything bent. THOMAS J. JEAKES.

DUTTON FAMILY (9 th S. vi. 409, 517; vii. 54, 117, 174, 293). If M. will kindly look into Ormerod's 'History of Cheshire,' he will find that I was correct in saying that the Duttons of Hatton, who on the extinction of the elder line soon after Poictiers became Duttons of Dutton, bore the fret argent in the second and third quarters of their coat.

It appears upon further research that instead of the Despencers being, as many thought, descended from the Duttons, the Duttons were descended from the Despencers in the female line; and I think there is proof that the fret in the Dutton coat, and also in that of Fouleshurst, had nothing to do with Poictiers, but was borne by these houses earlier. The Duttons would appear to have taken their coat from the Despencers. Mr. Horace Round, in his 'Studies on Peerage and Family History,' says :

"The clue to the origin of the Despencers is to be sought in the descent of the manor of Arnesby. This manor having escheated to the Crown with the rest of the fief of Peverel of Nottingham, Henry II. bestowed it on Hugh de Beauchamp, and Hugh proceeded to enfeoff there Elyas Dis- pensator, Radolphus de la Mare, and Hugo Alneto. These three were represented in or about 1212 by Thomas Dispensator, James de Mara, and Hugh de Alneto. Thomas was succeeded in his quarter fee at Erendebi by his younger brother Hugh."

But he left a daughter Muriel, who married Hugh Dutton of Dutton; and what more likely than that he adopted the Despencer coat minus the bend ? But how did the Despencers get their arms? Mr. Horace Round again helps. He says :

" Start on the coat of Mandeville, Quarterly or and gules, which Beauchamp of Bedford adopted as a relation, with the addition of a bend. Then Despencer would take this coat, altering the tincture of the first and fourth quarters, and adding a fret in the second and third for difference. It seems that fret and fretty were sometimes used for differ- encing."

With respect to the coat Fouleshurst of Barthomley, the fact that the elder branch bore fretty is a proof that this coat is older than the date of the beginning of the Barth- omley branch, and so older than Poictiers.

There is not equal proof with respect to the age of the coats of Delves and Hawk- stone, but both of these families held under the Audleys before Poictiers. Richard de Delves was constable of the Audley castle of Helegh before Poictiers ; and the Hawkstones of Wrinehill, which is within a mile or so of Helegh Castle, held Smallwood under the Audleys early in the fourteenth century.