In 1539 an Act “for the placing of the Lords in Parliament” (31 Hen. VIII. c. 10) was passed at the instance of the king, and by it the relative rank of the members of the royal family, of the great officers of state and the household, and of the hierarchy and the peerage was definitely and definitively ascertained. In 1563 an Act “for declaring the authority of the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal and the Lord Chancellor to be the same” (5 Eliz. c. 18) also declared their precedence to be the same. In 1689 an Act “for enabling Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal to execute the office of Lord Chancellor or Lord Keeper” ( 1 Will, and Mary c. 21) gave to the commissioners not being peers of the realm place next to the speaker of the House of Commons and to the speaker place next to the peers of the realm. In 1707 the Act of Union with Scotland (6 Anne c. 11) provided that all peers of Scotland should be peers of Great Britain and should have rank immediately after the peers of the like degrees in England at the time of the Union and before all peers of Great Britain of the like degrees created after the Union. In 1800 the Act of Union with Ireland (39 and 40 Geo. III. c. 67) provided that the lords spiritual of Ireland should have rank immediately after the lords spiritual of the same degree in Great Britain, and that the lords temporal of Ireland should have rank immediately after the lords temporal of the same degree in Great Britain at the time of the Union, and further that “peerages of Ireland created after the Union should have precedence with peerages of the United Kingdom created after the Union according to the dates of their creation.” At different times too during the current century several statutes have been passed for the reform and extension of the judicial organization which have very materially affected the precedence of the judges, more especially the Judicature Act of 1873 (36 and 37 Viet, c. 66), under which the lords justices of appeal and the justices of the High Court now receive their appointments. But the statute of Henry VIII. “for the placing of the Lords” still remains the only legislative measure in which it has been attempted to deal directly and systematically with any large and important section of the scale of general precedence; and the law, so far as it relates to the ranking of the sovereign’s immediate kindred whether lineal or collateral, the principal ministers of the crown and court, and both the spiritual and temporal members of the House of Lords, is to all practical intents and purposes what it was made by that statute nearly 350 years ago. Where no Act of parliament applies, precedence is determined either by the will and pleasure of the sovereign or by what is accepted as “ancient usage and established custom.” Of the sovereign’s will and pleasure the appropriate method of announcement is by warrant under the sign-manual, or letters patent under the great seal. But, although the crown has at all periods very frequently conceded special privileges of rank and place to particular persons, its interference with the scale of general precedence has been rare and exceptional. In 1540 it was provided by warrant from Henry VIII. that certain officers of the household therein named should precede the secretaries of state when and if they were under the degree of barons. In 1612 James I. directed by letters patent, not without long and elaborate argument in the Star Chamber, that baronets, then newly created, should be ranked after the younger sons of viscounts and barons, and that a number of political and judicial functionaries should be ranked between knights of the Garter and such knights bannerets as should be made by the sovereign in person “under his Standard displayed in an Army Royal in open war.” Four years later he further directed, also by letters patent, that the sons of baronets and their wives and the daughters of baronets should be placed before the sons of knights and their wives and the daughters of knights “of what degree or order soever.” And again in 1620 the same king commanded by warrant “after solemn argument before his Majesty” that the younger sons of earls should precede knights of the privy council and knights of the Garter not being “barons or of a higher degree.” If we add to these ordinances the provisions relating to precedence contained in the statutes of several of the orders of knighthood which since then have been instituted or reconstructed, we shall nearly, if not quite, exhaust the catalogue of the interpositions of the sovereign with regard to the rank and place of classes as distinguished from individuals. Of “ancient usage and established custom” the records of the College of Arms furnish the fullest and most trustworthy evidence. Among them in particular there is a collection of early tables of precedence which were published by authority at intervals from the end of the 14th to the end of the 15th century, and to which peculiar weight has been attached by many successive generations of heralds. On them, indeed, as illustrative of and supplementary to the action of parliament and the crown, all subsequent tables of precedence have been in great measure founded. The oldest is the “Order of All Estates of Nobles and Gentry,” prepared apparently for the coronation of Henry IV. in 1399, under the supervision of Ralph Nevill, earl of Westmoreland and earl marshal; and the next is the “Order of All States of Worship and Gentry,” prepared, as announced in the heading, for the coronation of Henry VI. in 1429, under the supervision of the lord protector Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, and the earl marshal, John Mowbray, duke of Norfolk. Two more are of the reign of Edward IV., and were severally issued by John Tiptoft, earl of Worcester and lord high constable, in 1467, and by Anthony Widvile, Earl Rivers and lord high constable, in 1479. The latest is commonly and shortly known as the “Series Ordinum,” and was drawn up by a special commission presided over by Jasper Tudor, duke of Bedford, it is presumed for observance at the marriage of Henry VII. and Elizabeth of York in 1486. To these may be added the “Order for the Placing of Lords and Ladies,” taken at a grand entertainment given by command of Henry VIII. at the king’s manor-house of Richmond in 1520 by Charles Somerset, earl of Worcester, lord chamberlain of the household, to the French ambassador, Olivier de la Vernade, seigneur de la Bâtie; the “Precedency of All Estates,” arranged in 1594 by the commissioners for executing the office of earl marshal; and the “Roll of the King’s Majesty’s most Royal Proceeding through London” from the Tower to Whitehall on the eve of the coronation of James I., also arranged by the commissioners for executing the office of earl marshal. On many isolated points, too, of more or less importance special declaratory decisions have been from time to time propounded by the earls marshal, their substitutes and deputies; for example, in 1594, when the younger sons of dukes were placed before viscounts; in 1625, when the rank of knights of the Bath and their wives was fixed; and in 1615 and 1677, when the eldest sons of the younger sons of peers were placed before the eldest sons of knights and of baronets. It is from these miscellaneous sources that the precedence among others of all peeresses, the eldest sons and their wives and the daughters of all peers, and the younger sons and their wives of all dukes, marquesses, and earls is ascertained and established. And further, for the purpose of proving continuity of practice and disposing of minor questions not otherwise and more conclusively set at rest, the official programmes and accounts preserved by the heralds of different public solemnities and processions, such as coronations, royal marriages, state funerals, national thanksgivings, and so on, have always been considered to be of great historical and technical value.

1.— General Precedence of Men.

The sovereign; (1) prince of Wales; (2) younger sons of the sovereign; (3) grandsons of the sovereign; (4) brothers of the sovereign; (5) uncles of the sovereign; (6) nephews of the sovereign; (7) archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England; (8) lord high chancellor of Great Britain or lord keeper of the great seal; (9) archbishop of York, primate of England; (10) lord high treasurer of Great Britain; (11) lord president of the privy council; (12) lord keeper of the privy seal; (13) lord great chamberlain of England; (14) lord high constable of England; (15) earl marshal; (16) lord high admiral: (17) lord steward of the household; (18) lord chamberlain of the household;, when the precedence of the office of Great Chamberlain fell under the operation of the 31st of Henry VIII.” {Order of Precedence, p. 20). The office of lord high constable of England is called out of abeyance for and pending coronations only. The office of earl marshal is hereditary in the Howards, dukes of Norfolk, premier dukes and, as earls of Arundel, premier earls of England, under a grant in special tail male from Charles II. in 1672. The office of lord high admiral, like the office of lord high treasurer, is practically extinct as a dignity. Since the reign of Queen Anne there has been only one lord high admiral, namely, William, duke of Clarence, afterwards William IV., for a few months in the Canning administration of 1827. The office is executed by commission, the lords of the admiralty being as destitute of any official precedence as the lords of the treasury, although the first lord of the admiralty is invariably a leading cabinet minister. The lord steward and the lord chamberlain of the household are always peers, and have seldom been under the degree of earls. We may here remark that both the Scottish and Irish Acts of Union make no reference to the precedence of the great officers of state of Scotland and Ireland. Not to mention the prince of Wales, who is by birth steward of Scotland, the earl of Shrewsbury is hereditary great seneschal of Ireland, and the earl of Errol is hereditary lord high constable of Scotland; but what places they are entitled to in the scale of general precedence is altogether doubtful and uncertain. In Ireland the great seneschal ranks after the lord chancellor if he is a commoner, and after the archbishop of Dublin if the lord chancellor is a peer, and in both cases before dukes (“Order of Precedence,” Dublin Gazette, 3d June 1843). Again, on George IV.’s visit to Edinburgh in 1821 the lord high constable had place as the first subject in Scotland immediately after the members of the royal family. At every coronation from that of George III. to that of Queen Victoria, the lord high constable of Scotland has been placed next to the earl marshal of England, and, although no rank has been assigned on these occasions to the hereditary great seneschal of Ireland, the lord high constable of Ireland appointed for the ceremony has been at all or most of them placed next to the lord high constable of Scotland. It is worthy of notice, however, that Sir George Mackenzie, writing when lord advocate of Scotland in the reign of Charles II., says that “the Constable and Marischal take not place as Officers of the Crown but according to their creation as Earls,” and he moreover expresses the opinion that “it seems very strange that these who ride upon the King’s right and left hand when he returns from his Parliaments and who guard the Parliament itself, and the Honours, should have no precedency by their offices” {Observations, &c., p. 25, in Guillim’s Display of Heraldry, p. 461 sq. ; but see also Wood-Douglas, Peerage of Scotland, vol. i. p. 557). ] (19) dukes; (20) marquesses; (21) dukes’ eldest sons; (22) earls; (23) marquesses’ eldest sons; (24) dukes’ younger sons; (25) viscounts; (26) earls’ eldest sons; (27) marquesses’ younger sons; (28) bishops; (29) barons; (30) speaker of the House of Commons; (31) commissioners of the great seal; (32) treasurer of the household; (33) comptroller of the household; (34) master of the horse; (35) vice-chamberlain of the household; (36) secretaries of state; (37)

viscounts’ eldest sons; (38) earls’ younger sons; (39) barons’ eldest sons; (40) knights of the Garter; (41) privy councillors; (42) chancellor of the exchequer; (43) chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster; (44) lord chief justice of England; (45) master of the rolls; (46) lords justices of appeal; (47) judges of the High Court of Justice; (48) knights bannerets made by the sovereign in person; (49) viscounts’ younger sons; (50) barons’ younger sons; (51) baronets; (52) knights bannerets not made by the sovereign in person; (53) knights of the first class of the Bath, the Star of India, and St Michael and St George; (54) knights of the second class of the Bath, the Star of India, and St Michael and St George; (55) knights bachelors; (56) eldest sons of the younger sons of peers; (57) baronets’ eldest sons; (58) knights’ eldest sons; (59) baronets’ younger sons; (60) knights’ younger sons; (61) companions of the Bath, the Star of India, St Michael and St George, and the Indian Empire; (62) esquires; (63) gentlemen.

2.— General Precedence of Women.

The queen; (1) princess of Wales; (2) daughters of the sovereign; (3) wives of the sovereign’s younger sons; (4) granddaughters of the sovereign; (5) wives of the sovereign’s grandsons; (6) sisters of the sovereign; (7) wives of the sovereign’s brothers; (8) aunts of the sovereign; (9) wives of the sovereign’s uncles; (10) nieces of the sovereign; (11) wives of the sovereign’s nephews;* (12) duchesses; (13) marchionesses; (14) wives of the eldest sons of dukes; (15) dukes’ daughters; (16) countesses; (17) wives of the eldest sons of marquesses; (18) marquesses’ daughters; (19) wives of the younger sons of dukes; (20) viscountesses; (21) wives of the eldest sons of earls; (22) earls’ daughters; (23) wives of the younger sons of marquesses; (24) baronesses; (25) wives of the eldest sons of viscounts; (26) viscounts’ daughters; (27) wives of the younger sons of earls; (28) wives of the eldest sons of barons; (29) barons’ daughters; (30) maids of honour to the queen; (31) wives of knights of the Garter; (32) wives of knights bannerets made by the sovereign in person; (33) wives of the younger sons of viscounts; (34) wives of the younger sons of barons; (35) baronets’ wives; (36) wives of knights bannerets not made by the sovereign in person; (37) Avives of knights grand crosses of the Bath, grand commanders of the Star of India, and grand crosses of St Michael and St George; (38) wives of knights commanders of the Bath, the Star of India, and St Michael and St George; (39) knights bachelors’ wives; (40) wives of the eldest sons of the younger sons of peers; (41) daughters of the younger sons of peers; (42) wives of the eldest sons of baronets; (43) baronets’ daughters; (44) wives of the eldest sons of knights; (45) knights’ daughters; (46) Avives of the younger sons of baronets; (47) wives of the younger sons of knights; (48) Avives of companions of the Bath, the Star of India, St Michael and St George, and the Indian Empire; (49) Avives of esquires; (5θ) gentlewomen.

Attention to the foregoing tables will show that general precedence is of different kinds as well as of several degrees. It is first either personal or official, and secondly either substantive or derivative. Personal precedence belongs to the royal family, the peerage, and certain specified classes of the commonalty. Official precedence belongs to such of the dignitaries of the church and such of the ministers of state and the household as have had rank and place accorded to them by parliament or the crown, to the speaker of the House of Commons, and to the members of the privy council and the judicature. Substantive precedence, which may be either personal or official, belongs to all those whose rank and place are enjoyed by them independently of their connexion with anybody else, as by the archbishop of Canterbury, the lord high chancellor or the lord great chamberlain, peers and peeresses, baronets, knights, and some esquires. Derivative precedence, which can only be personal, belongs to all those whose rank and place are determined by their consanguinity with or affinity to somebody else, as the lineal and collateral relations of the sovereign, the sons, daughters, and daughters-in-law of peers and peeresses in their own right, and the wives, sons, daughters, and daughters-in-law of baronets, knights, and some esquires. It is to be observed, however, that the precedence of the sovereign is at once official and personal, and that the precedence of peeresses by marriage is at once derivative and substantive. In the case of the sovereign it is his or her actual tenure of the office of king or queen which regulates the rank and place of the various members of the royal family, and in the case of peeresses by marriage, although their rank and place are derivative in origin, yet they are substantive in continuance, since during coverture and widowhood peeresses by marriage are as much peeresses as peeresses in their own right, and theii’ legal and political status is precisely the same as if they had acquired it by creation or inheritance.

Bearing the above definitions and explanations in mind, the following canons or rules may be found practically useful.

1. Anybody who is entitled to both personal and official precedence is to be placed according to that which implies the higher rank. If, for example, a baron and a baronet are both privy councillors, the precedence of the first is that of a baron and the precedence of the second is that of a privy councillor. And similarly, except as hereafter stated, with respect to the holders of two or more personal or two or more official dignities.

2. Save in the case of the sovereign, official rank can never supply the foundation for derivative rank. Hence the official precedence of a husband or father affords no indication of the personal precedence of his wife or children. The wives aud children, for example, of the archbishop of Canterbury, the lord high chancellor, or the speaker of the House of Commons do not participate in their official rank but only in their personal rank whatever it may be.

3. Among subjects men alone can convey derivative rank, except in the case of the daughters and sisters of the sovereign, or of peeresses in their own right. But no man can acquire any rank or place by maιτiage. The sons-in-law or brothers-in-law of the sovereign and the husbands of peeresses in their own right have as such no precedence whatever. And the daughter and heiress of the premier duke of England, unless she happens to be also a peeress in her own right, does not transmit any...