_Births, Marriages, &c., Taxes on_ (Vol. ii., p. 10.).--The first instance, that I am aware of, of a tax on marriages in this country, occurs in the 5 of Wm. and Mary, c. 21. The war in which William engaged soon rendered it necessary to tax other incidents of humanity; and accordingly the 6 & 7 Wm. III. c. 6. was passed, granting to his Majesty certain {61} rates and duties upon marriages, births, deaths, and burials, and upon bachelors and widowers (a widely-spread net), for the term of five years, "for carrying on the war against France with vigour." The taxes on births, marriages, and burials were continued indefinitely by the 7 & 8 Wm. III. c. 35. I know not when this act was repealed; but by the 23 George III. c. 67., taxes were again imposed on burials, births, marriages, and christenings; and by 25 George III. c. 75. these taxes were extended to Dissenters. By the 34 George III. c. 11., the taxes were repealed, and they ceased on October 1st, 1794. The entries in the parish register noticed by ARUN, refer to these taxes. Query, Were our ancestors justified in boasting that they were "free-born" Englishmen as long as one of these taxes existed? C. ROSS. _M._ or _N._ (Vol. i., p. 415.).--These must, I think, be the initials of some words, and not originating in a corruption of nom, as suggested. We have in the marriage service:-- "'I publish the banns of marriage between M. of ---- and N. of ----.' "The curate shall say unto the man, "M. 'Wilt thou have this woman,' &c. "The priest shall say unto the woman, "N. 'Wilt thou have this man,' &c. "The man says: 'I, M. take thee N. to my wedded wife,' &c. "The woman says: 'I, N. take thee M. to my wedded husband,'" &c. Again, "Forasmuch as M. and N. have consented together," &c. All these passages would go to show that the letters are initials either of some word by which the sex was denoted, or of some very common Christian names of each sex, which were formerly in use. I grant that, in the baptismal service, N. may possibly stand for nomen. THOS. COX. Preston. _Arabic Numerals._--I am not entitled to question either the learning or the "acumen" of the Bishop of Rochester; but I am entitled to question the _interpretation_ which E. S. T. tells us (Vol. ii., p.27.) he puts upon the Castleacre inscription. My title to do so is this:--that in the year of grace 1084 the Arabic numerals were not only of necessity unknown to the "plaisterers" of those walls, but even (as far as evidence has been yet adduced) to the most learned of England's learned men.