Now, I have always considered that the English language, in this as in many other instances, possessed two words which, though alike in sound, were very different both in origin and meaning:--_surname_, i.e. _sur-nom_, the name added to the common appellation, for the purpose of distinguishing an individual; as Rufus, Coeur de Lion, Lackland, in the case of our early kings: and _sir-name_, or _sire-name_, being that which in recent times, and in most countries, every one born in wedlock has inherited from his sire, and which is the subject of the articles in "N. & Q." As I do not suppose that your correspondents, the last of whom is of considerable authority on this subject, have used the term unadvisedly, I am anxious to know the grounds on which they would disallow my theory. E. H. Y. I am glad to perceive that MR. LOWER has on the stocks a systematic Dictionary of Surnames. For the reason stated by him, it is neither desirable nor possible that it should include _all_ English surnames. The majority derive their origin from places or districts of limited dimensions, and to enumerate them would be an interminable and very thankless task. MR. L. has therefore judiciously determined to exercise his discretion on this class of cases. Nor are the names derived from Christian names generally worth insertion, for every Christian name has, in some form, been converted into a surname, either with or without alteration. Those which originate in _extinct_ or _provincial_ employments and trades will supply an instructive and interesting collection, such as Tucker, Challoner, Tozer, Crowder, Berner, &c.; and will also afford scope for glossarial illustration. I also trust that his etymological research will be successfully exercised on such names as-- Nettleship Moneypenny Peabody Sidebottom Sheepshanks Snodgrass Wiggins Figgins Higgins Wigglesworth Calcraft Lammercraft, and other crafts (crofts?) Pennefather Ocock Pocock Locock, and omne quod exit in cock, of which some forty or fifty are in use.