"Sir Joseph Jekyll, when Master of the Rolls, in the year
1730, remarks--'I am satisfied the usage of passing Acts of
Parliament for the taking upon one a surname is but modern;
and that any one may take upon him what surname, and as many
surnames, as he pleases, without an Act of Parliament.' The
decree in the above case was reversed in the House of Lords."

Mr. Markland adds,--

"From the facts and deductions here stated, it would seem
that the Master of the Rolls had good ground for making his
decree. The law, as it stands, however, had grown out of the
_practice_: and common prudence dictates, that the assumption
of a new surname should now be accompanied by such an
authority as may establish beyond all question the legality of
the act."

It must also be remembered, that a testator often directs that a
devisee shall procure the royal license or an Act of Parliament
for the change of name, in order to entitle him to the testator's
property. If this direction be neglected, could not the party next
benefited sue for it on that ground, and with success?

S.D.D.


_Change of Name_ (No. 16. p. 246.).--The doctrine, that a person
may change his surname without any formality whatever, has long
been "settled," and is by no means of so recent a date as your