"It was not without reason that he affected to make use of obscure expressions, which left undetermined the foundation upon which he built his pretended right. If he seemed to derive his title from Henry III. rather than from Edward III., his grandfather, it was because there was a rumour that Edmund, Earl of Lancaster, surnamed Crouch-back, was eldest son of Henry III.; but by reason of his deformity Edward I., his younger brother, was placed on the throne. According to this supposition, the Duke would have made the ignorant believe he could ground his title upon being son of Blanch of Lancaster, granddaughter of Edmund Crouch-back, and heiress of that family. But as he was sensible everybody could not be imposed upon by so gross a forgery, he added certain expressions, intimating that he built his right also upon the service he had just done the state. This is the meaning of the claim, expressed in such obscure terms. As it was resolved to adjudge the crown to the Duke, the Parliament took care not to examine his claim too closely, but were very willing to suppose it uncontestable. Thus, without any regard to the just rights of the Earl of March, it was decreed that Henry should be proclaimed king, which was done that very day," &c. It would seem, however, that Henry was to a certain extent compelled to make his claim to the crown in the form he did (Hales, _Hist. C. L._ c. 5.), notwithstanding his desire to do so as a conqueror. (Seld. _Tit. Hon._ l. 3.) J. B. COLMAN. * * * * * Replies to Minor Queries. _Chauncy--Entwysel._--To a dry genealogical Query (Vol. iii., p. 61.), your readers will wish me to reply as briefly as possible. F. R. R. will find that Sir H. Chauncy's statement is borrowed from Weever. The latter founded his statement, that "Wilfred Entwysel was the last heir of his house," on the authority of Dalton, Norroy; but this statement, as your correspondent has shown, and as other evidence would prove, is not well-founded. It may be assumed that Sir Bertyne Entwysel did not leave issue, _male_, by Lucy his wife, the daughter of Sir John Ashton, of Ashton-under-Lyne, as Leland speaks of a daughter only, "of whom Master Bradene, of Northamptonshire, is descended." His connexion with Lancashire is shown by his epitaph, and by our finding his name as a witness to a Lancashire charter. The alliance which he formed may be urged as a further proof. Leland's expression, that "he came into England," may imply that Sir Bertyne remained in France discharging the duties of his office, from the period of the Battle of Agincourt, where he {172} signally distinguished himself, until his services were again called for in the Wars of the Roses. J. H. M.