"It is also described in the Oxford Architectural Society's
_Manual of Mon. Brasses_, No. 6. pp. 6, 7. other examples of
which occur at Rochester, Kent, and at Cobham, Surrey. A small
plate of brass, in the possession of a friend, has on one side
a group of children, and on the reverse the uplifted hands of
an earlier figure."
And lastly, one from "A.P.H." (to which we cannot do ample
justice, as we do not keep an engraver), from which we extract
the following passages:--
"A friend of mine has a shield in his possession, taken from
a slab, and which has been enamelled. It is of late date
and rudely executed. On the back is {371} seen the hands and
breast of a small female figure, very nearly a century earlier
in date. I can also remember an inscription in Cuxton Church,
Kent, which was loose, and had another inscription on the back
in the same manner.
"I am very much impressed with the idea that the destroyed
brasses never had been used at all; but had been engraved,
and then, from circumstances that of course we cannot hope to
fathom, thrown on one side till the metal might be used for
some other purpose. This, I think, is a more probable, as well
as a more charitable explanation than the one usually given of
the so-called palimpsest brasses."]
_Chapels_ (No. 20. p. 333.).--As to the origin of the name, will you
allow me to refer Mr. Gatty to Ducange's _Glossary_, where he will
find much that is to his purpose.
As to its being "a legal description," I will not undertake to
give an opinion without a fee; but I will mention a fact which may
assist him in forming one. I believe that fifty years ago the word
_Chapel_ was very seldom used among those who formed what was termed
the "Dissenting Interest;" that is, the three "denominations" of
Independents, Baptists, and Presbyterians. But I well recollect
hearing, from good authority, nearly, or quite, forty years ago, that
an eminent barrister (whom I might now describe as a late learned
judge), who was much looked up to by the dissenters as one of their
body, had particularly advised that in all trust-deeds relating to
places of dissenting worship, they should be called "Chapels." I do
not know that he assigned any reason, but I know that the opinion was
given, or communicated, to those who had influence; and, from my own
observation, I believe that from about that time we must date the
adoption of the term, which has now been long in general use.
I do not imagine that there was any idea of either assistance
or opposition to the Church of England, in the mind of him who
recommended, or those who adopted, the alteration, or that either
of them expected or sought any thing by this measure but to obtain
a greater security for property, or, rather, to avoid some real
or imagined insecurity, found or supposed to attach to the form of
description previously in use.