RIGHT TO USE COATS-OF-ARMS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19269, 5 January 1931, Page 8

RIGHT TO USE COATS-OF-ARMS.

HERALDRY NOT A LOST ART, MR ELL STATES.

Although there are few New Zealand families entitled to display a coat-of-arms or crest, Mr 11. G. Ell, who has made a close study of the subject, states that any man who has rendered conspicuous public service is entitled to apply to the College of Arms for authority to display arms. In doing so he must submit a sketch showing the design which he wishes to adopt and also particulars of the public service _ he has rendered to the community. The decision as to whether he shall be granted a certificate entitling him to a family coat-of-arms or crest rests with the College of Arms. “A coat-of-arms or a crest can’t be bought like a picture in a shop, but it is true that manj- families display them without any legal right to do so,” said Mr Ell. “ Arms are purely personal and no one displaying them is allowed to infringe on the rights of other people.” Family Coats-of-Arms. Mr Ell mentioned that his own family had a coat-of-arms, but he never used it, as he was in some doubt as to whether he was descended from the eldest son of the first Ell to whom the arms had been granted. The Clifford family, he said, was one of the few in New Zealand entitled to arms. Local bodies using arms were required to apply to have them registered, but many did not bother to do so. The right to use arms was also granted to a number of trade unions, such as the carpenters’, harness makers' and goldsmiths’ unions. The livery companies had their own coats-of-arms. Heraldry was not a dead or dying art, he said. The College of Arms was a properly constituted State institution. Heraldry came into existence about the twelfth century. There was a fantastic storv that William the Conqueror introduced heraldry, but it was quite incorrect. The City Mayoral Chain. With reference to the statement made by Mr Arthur D. Ford in his article in the “Star” on Saturday that the Christchurch Mayoral chain contains a reproduction of an unauthorised coat of arms, the Town Clerk (Mr J. S. Neville) said today that each Mayor on his retirement added a link bearing a design chosen by himself. One Mayor went to a great deal of trouble in trying to find out what was his family coat of arms, but it was possible that others were not so particular regarding the matter. Some of the links did not have coats* of arms on them. It was entirely a matter for each retiring Mayor to decide for himself, and, as Town Clerk, he did not interfere' in regard to the choice of link.

Mr Neville said he did not know the history of the city coat of arms and he was not aware whether it was registered or not. The design of the shield included in the arms was carved <>n the stonework of the old City Coun-

cil Chambers at the corner of Oxford Terrace and Worcester Street, and presumably it was adopted some years before the building was erected in ISB6. He had tried to find out whether it was registered or not, but he had pot succeeded in obtaining the information. The motto, “ Britons, Hold Your Own,” was added to the arms some vears ago on the motion of Mr ,1. O. Jameson, who was then a member of the council. Prior to that date there was no resolution in, the minutes of the council recognising the motto.