Gambar halaman
PDF

impressed but both seals have been broken into fragments and utterly destroyed—only pieces of some finely powdered red wax still remain clinging here and there to the instrument as evidence that it was once sealed. It is therefore impossible to tell whether or not any impression of arms of any kind was ever on either seal. This deed is quoted under the record of James2 King (No.

3)

The second document is the last will and testament of James King, made the "tenth day of May Annoque Domini one thousand seven hundred and twenty two," now on file in the Court of Probate of Hampshire County at Northampton, Mass. The wax seal after the signature of James King is also broken and only small fragments thereof remain so that as to this document it is impossible now to tell whether any design or arms once appeared thereon. Mr. Hubbard M. Abbott, Register of the Court, made an examination of the seal thereon, at my request (Aug. 1904) and wrote to me as follows: "I have made a careful examination of the original will to find out about the seal. I think there was once a seal to his name as there are traces of sealing wax after his name, but there is not the least trace left of any design." This will is also quoted at length under James2 King (No. 3).

Although the seals upon both the above described instruments have been so broken as to obliterate any designs or coat of arms which formerly may have appeared thereon, yet the size and general appearance of the powdered remains of the seals seem to indicate that some impression by a circular signet originally had been made.

The third document is a deed made by James King of Sufneld to Joseph King, his son, and dated the "twenty-second day of Febry. in the eighth year of his Majesties Reign Annoque Dom. 1721-2," three months before his death. A photographic copy of this deed. is given hereafter under the name of "James2 King (William1) No. 3." (This deed is now in the possession of Harvey J. King, Esq., of Troy, N. Y., having been given to him recently by Miss Margaret E. King.) Fortunately the seal to this instrument, while cracked and broken in places, is yet fairly well preserved and shows plainly the King Coat of Arms thereon. The shield, the chevron with three escallops thereon, and the lower cross-crosslet can be easily seen impressed upon the red wax. There are breaks in the wax in the places where the two upper crosses-crosslet belong and they can scarcely be distinguished. The helmet, however, resting upon the top of the shield and the mantling like scroll work, extending from the helmet down along both sides of the shield, are quite plain.

On the page facing this we give an enlarged photographic print of this seal. The arms were impressed upside down upon the wax seal so that the single cross-crosslet is on the upper portion and the helmet, head downwards, is on the lower portion of the seal. By turning this book so that the upper portion of the page having the photographic prints of the seal thereon, will be at the bottom, the coat of arms on the seal will be more easily recognized.

For the purpose of comparison another photographic print of the seal on a later instrument (Joseph King A. D., 1728) but made by the same signet, is placed also upside down beneath the photographic copy of the seal made by James King. It must be borne in mind that the photograph of the seal on the instrument executed by James King has been considerably enlarged so as to exhibit more plainly the lines and figures on the same. The seal on the instrument being all of one color, red sealing wax, and the signet having evidently been pressed very lightly upon the wax, and this wax also having been chafed, worn and broken in places during the one hundred and eighty-five years that have elapsed since the execution of the instrument, the photograph does not (and no photograph can) make the King arms appear as plainly as they really do on the original document.

This deed, executed by James King to his son Joseph, and the seal thereon, is clear and conclusive evidence of the use of the King Coat of Arms by James King, the founder of the King family of Suffield, Connecticut.

It should also be remembered that James King was an immigrant from England and that there were no known engravers of seals in America at that time. In this connection we might call attention to the fact that the Committee on Heraldry, of the New England Historic Genealogical Society, which had given great attention to the early use in America of armorial bearings by colonial families, in a report made to the Society June 1, 1864,

[ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors][graphic][graphic][ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[graphic][graphic][ocr errors][graphic][graphic][merged small]
« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »