consequences to which allusion has been made. These transcripts, by being bound in a separate volume, together with plans of the church and church-yard, and appropriate references, will be invaluable. The Leigh case before the house of lords, on the claim to the barony of Leigh, in 1828, exhibits one of those instances of the want of similar care in the preservation of family sepulchral monuments, in which not only a title of peerage, but claim to property was deeply involved. It was alleged in that case that a stone affording important evidence had been removed from Stoneley church some years previously, and much conflicting testimony respecting it was given on that occasion. It may be difficult to say what regulation could be adopted to prevent the surreptitious removal of monuments, but when it becomes necessary that they should be removed for any legitimate purpose, the parties desirous of so doing should be bound under a penalty to return them to their former place within some given period, a copy of the inscription having been also previously deposited with the minister, and to remove any sepulchral stone otherwise should be made a punishable offence.
