_ _ ` _______' _ 7_'~ ~-- 1.---.F__ .,--f ~ --?- --~- ~ ss NOTES AND QUERIES. [9"‘S-VI-Ave-4.1900- word port=a doorway was to be guilty of tautoloagy ; but as it stood the phrase merely sigmli the gateway at the road which led to the gallows. The Latin charters of an earlier time relating to Scottish burghs, of which I have examined many thousands, have no trace of dubiety. The road is fvicus, while the gate of the city is porta. I have repeated t is explanation in my ‘B 'gone Glasggw’ (l_897§ and in ‘ Dundee, its Qluaint and lstoric uildings’ (1895), and have given examples of the corrupt form of spelling both in Glasgow and Dundee. The very p rase “ Cowgate Port ” is a confutation of_Ma. ARMSTRONG’S theory. The Nether- gait clearly means the road on one side, while the Over-Salt signifies the road on the other side; an in neither case had they the slightest connexion with city gates. May I new hope that, with the aid of ‘N . dz Q.,’ I have entirely slain this popular error? A. H. MILLAR. Dundee. I believe that there is still standing a gate- way) which belonged to the old city wall of Du lm. It 18 (or was 1) called St. Audoen’s Arch from its proximity to St. Audoen’s (==St. Owen’s) Church, which was built before 1200. The Rev. C. T. McCread ', in his very accurate and exhaustive work ‘ Dublin Street Names Dated and Explained ’ (Hodges, 1892), states that the arch is the only remaining gateway of the city wall, and that it was in _ormer_days “sometimes called Town’s-Arch, ae. [Sa1n]’t Owen’s Arch, and sometimes the Water-gate.” Some curious particulars about the “luck stone” which belonged to this arch will be found in a communication from mg father, the "late CANON LEEPER, in ‘ . 5&n_Q.,’ 4* S. vm. 537. Amex. Learns. Trinity College, Melbourne University. The town of Great Yarmouth had ten gates, all of which have perished, but four or live of which existed up to early in the gresent century. The names of the ten were orth, South, Pudding, Market, Oxney’s, Mount, L1_ttle Mount, ymonds’s or Rope- makers’, Little or Garden, and Church gates. W. B. GERISH. STAFQORD FAMILY (9“‘ S. v. 316, 522).--I am obliged by the courtesy of MR. A. C. FOX-DAVIES in repl ing to my uery respect- ing the dignity andyprnvilege dl barons. In stating that a baron who “held land in barony ” was not thereby a lord of Parlia- ment, Mn. Fox-Davies appears to lose sight of the fact that for a long period post conq. two classes of barons are named, majores barones and lesser barons. The former, called also the king’s barons, not only held their dignity per baromhm, but by virtue of that holdin were also lords of Par iament. By Domesday llook the tenants of the Crown appear to be above seven hundred; et the number of earls and barons are stated not to have exceeded three hundred, so that it must be evident that while the king’s barons were tenants-in-chief of the king; all tenants-in- chief of the king were not t e kir}g’s barons, or barons regm. The charter of ing John, requiring special writs to be sent to those persons designated as 'ores barones, must be viewed to have beenygopted to distinguish such persons from others to whom the word barons without distinction might have applied. The word bare in many instances included all the immediate tenants of the Crown by military service, and sometimes it applied to the freehold tenants of a manor; but in this instance the denomination majores barones seems decidedly confined to those only who were esteemed the king’s barons, or lords of Parliament, name y, persons higher in dignity than those meant to be summoned by writ eneralgy. During the reign of Iienry . the word barones included the inferior vassals as well as the barons of the Crown. It will be seen that Robert de Stafford called his vassals barones mei in his deed of 1086, printed in vol. ii. of the ‘Staffordshire Collec- tions.’ The use of the word in its original sense is still apparent in the titles of the “Barons of the Cinque Ports” and “Court Baron.” Whether the distinction originated in the charter of King John or had a more early origin there are no records to decide ; yet, from the instrument itself, it may be presumed that the term majores baroncs was a term and distinction then well understood, and consequently was not a concession, but a confirmation of an antecedent right. The right of the baronage, or commune consilium of King John, to be summoned for tllgfrant- ing of aids may be justlyeapprecia as a right never attempted to infringed other- wise than by the false assumption of a despotic power, which, in the instance of Charles I. in the case of ship-money, led the mistaken monarch to the block. J UBAL STAFFORD. Edgeley, Stockport. “Comme OUT or Tm: LITTLE END or THE sons” (ve S. iv. ass; vii. 257, 376; sw S. iv. 1‘14, 156).-In this connexion it ma be in- teresting to note that in “The Cbmpters Common-wealth, by William Fenner, his Majestys servant,” 4to., 1617, p. 5, there is mention of “a Hall hung round about with
