COAT ARMOR AND THE RIGHT TO BEAR IT
Bishop Meade says of William Ball's coat of arms: "There is much
that is bold about it: as a lion rampant with a globe in his paw,
with helmet, shield and visor, and other things betokening strength
and courage, but none these things suit of my work! There is,
however, one thing that does. On a scroll are these words, _Cælum
tueri!_ May it be a memento to all his posterity to look upward and
seek the things which are above!"
The Bishop attached, probably, more importance to the heraldic
distinction than did the mother of Washington. Virginia families
used the arms to which they had a right with no thought of
ostentation--simply as something belonging to them, as a matter of
course. They sealed their deeds and contracts with their family
crest and motto, displayed their arms on the panels of their
coaches, carved them on their gate-posts and on the tombstones of
their people; for such had been the custom in the old country which
they fondly called "home."
The pedigrees and coats of arms of the families, from which Mary
Ball and her illustrious son descended, have been much discussed
by historians. "Truly has it been said that all the glories of
ancestral escutcheons are so overshadowed by the deeds of Washington
that they fade into insignificance; that a just democracy, scornful
of honors not self-won, pays its tribute solely to the man, the
woman, and the deed; that George Washington was great because he
stood for the freedom of his people, and Mary Washington was great
because she implanted in his youthful breast righteous indignation
against wrong, which must ever be the inspiration of the hero. And
yet the insignia of a noble name, handed down from generation to
generation, and held up as an incentive to integrity and valor,
may well be cherished." The significance of the shield granted as
reward, and the sentiment chosen as the family motto, are not to be
ignored. The shield witnesses a sovereign's appreciation; the motto
affords a key-note to the aspirations of the man who chose it. Not
of the women! for only under limitations could women use the shield;
the motto they were forbidden to use at all. Mottoes often expressed
lofty sentiments. Witness a few taken from Virginia families of
English descent: _Malo mori quam foedari_. _Sperate et Virite
Fortes_ (Bland), _Sine Deo Cares_ (Cary), _Ostendo non ostento_
(Isham), _Rêve et Révéle_ (Atkinson), etc.
At the present moment the distinction of a coat of arms is highly
esteemed in this country. Families of English descent can always
find a shield or crest on some branch, more or less remote, of the
Family Tree. The title to these arms may have long been extinct--but
who will take the trouble to investigate? The American cousin scorns
and defies rules of heraldry! To be sure, he would prefer assuming
a shield once borne by some ancestor, but if that be impossible,
he is quite capable of marshalling his arms to suit himself. Is
not "a shield of pretence" arms which a lord claims and which he
adds to his own? Thus it comes to pass that the crest, hard won in
deadly conflict, and the motto once the challenging battle-cry,
find themselves embalmed in the perfume of a fine lady's tinted
billet, or proudly displayed on the panels of her park equipage.
Thus is many a hard-won crest and proud escutcheon of old England
made to suffer the extreme penalty of the English law, "drawn and
quartered," and dragged captive in boastful triumph at the chariot
wheels of the Great Obscure! They can be made to order by any
engraver. They are used, unchallenged, by any and every body willing
to pay for them.
It may, therefore, be instructive to turn the pages of old Thomas
Fuller's "Worthies of England," and learn the rigid laws governing
the use of arms by these "Worthies."
The "fixing of hereditary arms in England was a hundred years
ancienter than Richard the Second"--in 1277, therefore. Before his
second invasion into France, Henry V issued a proclamation to the
sheriffs to this effect: "Because there are divers men who have
assumed to themselves arms and coat-armours where neither they nor
their ancestors in times past used such arms or coat-armours, all
such shall show cause on the day of muster why he useth arms and by
virtue of whose gift he enjoyeth the same: those only excepted who
carried arms with us at the battle of Agincourt;" and all detected
frauds were to be punished "with the loss of wages, as also the
rasing out and breaking off of said arms called coat-armours--and
this," adds his Majesty, with emphasis, "you shall in no case omit."
By a later order there was a more searching investigation into
the right to bear arms. A high heraldic officer, usually one of
the kings-at-arms, was sent into all the counties to examine the
pedigrees of the landed gentry, with a view of ascertaining whether
the arms borne by them were unwarrantably assumed. The king-at-arms
was accompanied on such occasions by secretaries or draftsmen. The
"Herald's Visitations," as they were termed, were regularly held as
early as 1433, and until between 1686 and 1700. Their object was by
no means to create coats of arms but to reject the unauthorized,
and confirm and verify those that were authentic. Thus the arms
of the Ball and Washington families had been subjected to strict
scrutiny before being registered in the Heralds' College. They could
not have been unlawfully assumed by the first immigrant, nor would
he, while living in England, have been allowed to mark his property
or seal his papers with those arms nor use them in any British
colony.