_Becket's Mother_ (Vol. i., pp. 415. 490.; vol. ii., p. 78.).--Although
the absence of any contemporaneous relation of this lady's romantic
history may raise a reasonable doubt of its authenticity, it seems to
derive indirect confirmation from the fact, that the hospital founded by
Becket's sister shortly after his death, on the spot where he was born,
part of which is now the Mercers' chapel in Cheapside, was called "The
Hospital of St. Thomas the Martyr _of Acon_." Erasmus, also, in his
_Pilgrimages to Walsingham and Canterbury_ (see J.G. Nichol's excellent
translation and notes, pp. 47. 120.), says that the archbishop was
called "Thomas _Acrensis_."
Edward Foss.
_"Imprest" and "Debenture."_--Perhaps the following may be of some use
to D.V.S. (Vol. ii., p. 40.) in his search for the verbal raw material
out of which these words were manufactured.
Their origin may, I think, be found in the Latin terms used in the
ancient accounts of persons {107} officially employed by the crown to
express transactions somewhat similar to those for which they appear to
be now used. Persons conversant with those records must frequently have
met with cases where money advanced, paid on account, or as earnest, was
described as "de prestito" or "in prestitis." Ducange gives "præstare"
and its derivatives as meaning "mutuo dare" with but little variation;
but I think that too limited a sense. The practice of describing a
document itself by the use of the material or operative parts expressing
or defining the transaction for which it was employed, is very common.
In legal and documentary proceedings, it is indeed the only one that is
followed. Let D.V.S. run over and compare any of the well-known
descriptions of writs, as _habeas corpus_, _mandamus_, _fi. fa._: or
look into Cowell's _Interpreter_, or a law dictionary, and he will see
numerous cases where terms now known as the names of certain documents
are merely the operative parts of Latin _formulæ_. "Imprest" seems to be
a slightly corrupted translation of "in prestito;" that part of the
instrument being thus made to give its name to the whole. Of "debenture"
I think there is little doubt that it may be similarly explained. Those
Record Offices which possess the ancient accounts and vouchers of
officers of the royal household contain numerous "debentures" of the
thirteenth, but far more of the fourteenth, century. In this case the
_initial_ is the chief operative word: those relating to the royal
wardrobe, commencing "Debentur in garderoba domini regis," being in fact
merely memorandums expressing or acknowledging that certain sums of
money "are owing" for articles supplied for the use of that department.
It is well known that the royal exchequer was, at the time these
documents were executed, often in great straits; and it seems to me
scarcely doubtful that these early "debentures" were actually delivered
over to tradesmen, &c., as security for the amount due to them, and
given in to be cancelled when the debts were discharged by the Exchequer
officers.
There is a remarkable feature about these ancient "debentures" which I
may perhaps be permitted to notice here, viz., the very beautiful seals
of the officers of the royal household and wardrobe which are impressed
upon them. They are of the somewhat rare description known as
"appliqué;" and at a time when personal seals were at the highest state
of artistic developement, those few seals of the clerks of the household
which have escaped injury (to which they are particularly exposed) are
unrivalled for their clearness of outline, design, delicacy, and beauty
of execution.
Allowing for the changes produced by time, I think sufficient analogy
may be found between the ancient and modern uses of the words "imprest"
and "debenture."