"That is just what they wanted--to be strictly exact. Now, if he was no longer 'Junior,' then he did not die 'Junior." Consequently it must be incorrect so to describe him on the headstone. Do you see the point?" "Here is a rather curious thing," said Mr. Filkins, "that I have just remembered. A man wrote to me the other day that he had recently discovered two old coins while digging in his garden. One was dated '51 B.C.,' and the other one marked 'George I.' How do I know that he was not writing the truth?" "Perhaps you know the man to be addicted to lying," said Reginald. "But that would be no proof that he was not telling the truth in this instance." "Perhaps," suggested Mildred, "you know that there were no coins made at those dates. "On the contrary, they were made at both periods." "Were they silver or copper coins?" asked Willie. "My friend did not state, and I really cannot see, Willie, that it makes any difference." "I see it!" shouted Reginald. "The letters 'B.C.' would never be used on a coin made before the birth of Christ. They never anticipated the event in that way. The letters were only adopted later to denote dates previous to those which we call 'A.D.' That is very good; but I cannot see why the other statement could not be correct." "Reginald is quite right," said Mr. Filkins, "about the first coin. The second one could not exist, because the first George would never be described in his lifetime as 'George I.'" "Why not?" asked Mrs. Allgood. "He _was_ George I." "Yes; but they would not know it until there was a George II." "Then there was no George II. until George III. came to the throne?" "That does not follow. The second George becomes 'George II.' on account of there having been a 'George I.'" "Then the first George was 'George I.' on account of there having been no king of that name before him." "Don't you see, mother," said George Allgood, "we did not call Queen Victoria 'Victoria I.;' but if there is ever a 'Victoria II.,' then she will be known that way." "But there _have_ been several Georges, and therefore he was 'George I.' There _haven't_ been several Victorias, so the two cases are not similar." They gave up the attempt to convince Mrs. Allgood, but the reader will, of course, see the point clearly.