[113] In justice to Gyll, the polemist, I reprint his two letters contributed to _Notes and Queries_ (May 25, 1861, and July 27, 1861):-- (_a_) "A STATIONER writes his remarks on the subject of some alterations on lapidary inscriptions in Wraysbury Church: and pray, Sir, by what right does this tradesman ask any family why they choose to change a monumental reading, provided nothing is inserted which militates against truth? What has the world to do with family arrangements? And whether is the article to be taken for a _charge_ or a _lament_? I only wish this busy citizen to employ his time more profitably--while I wonder that any periodical should condescend to introduce the subject, without notice being given to members of the family, and an inquiry made. If they had reasons good for it, what on earth does the public care about it? Certain words on certain monuments were not approved by a county family, and they were omitted: and lo! a citizen rises to impeach the _proprietary_ of it. The case stands thus, Monument No. 1: This was an unusually large slab, on which the simple record of the deaths of Wm. Gyll, Esq., and his wife, were only inscribed. The family thought the space might be occupied by the addition of other family names, &c.--and it was done. And now the slab is full. No. 2. Wm. Gyll, Esq., was styled here Equerry to H.R.H. Duke of Sussex; but that he was also Captain in the 2nd Life Guards was omitted. It was deemed expedient to make room for its insertion, and it was done. No. 3. On Mrs. Paxton's monument, a daughter of Wm. Gyll, Esq., the latter gentleman is styled _of this parish_; and as he had considerable property here, it was his proper designation. Room was made to effect this, and it was done. There are thirteen monuments to the family of Gyll, or relations, in the chancel of Wraysbury Church; and where the patronymic was spelt with an _i_ as formerly, instead of _y_ as latterly, a change was made that these names might correspond with the same orthography on other monuments (see Chauncey & Clutterbuck, _Herts_), and with antique deeds (see _Collectanea Topographica_, vol. viii.). The family for many years had returned to the _original_ mode of spelling their patronymic, to distinguish them from other families similarly called; and for this privilege a permission was obtained by _sign manual_ in 1844. And if a correspondent change was made on the monuments, what has anyone in the world to do with it but the family? In one case a mistaken date was inscribed, 17th for 26th March. This is made a _charge and a crime_ by this miserable citizen critic, as if these mistakes were made purposely. In two cases Dr. Lipscomb's monumental inscriptions give _widow_ for wife, and _Sept._ for April. Had the STATIONER, who is so wonderfully correct, and turns all things to wrongs, gone or sent to Wraysbury, he would have found _his_ improvements already on the monuments.