EXAMPLE OF A CONFIRMATION OR RECORD OF ARMS:-- Theis are the anncient Armes and Creast, belonging to the name and famely of LEECHFORDE in the County of Surrey, descended from the LEECHFORDS in Buckinghamsheire. Which at the request of S{R} RICHARD LEECHFORDE of Shelwood in the County of Surrey Knight, I WILL’M SEGAR Garter, Principall King of Armes have blasoned, and sett forth in coullors, according as they are here depicted in the margent. Viz.” (here follows a written blazon).... “Testifying hereby the saide armoryes to belong vnto the saide S{R} RICHARD LEECHFORD and to his yssue, to vse, beare, and shewe forth at all tymes, and in all places, at their free lib’ty and pleasure. In Witnes wherof.... &c. &c., with Seal and Signature, and the Date 3rd of JAMES I. I presume that an argument in support of the abolition of all Taxation of “Armorial Bearings,” on the plea of the utter absurdity of a tax upon an honourable distinction, would be met with the reply that “Armorial Bearings” are taxed purely as “luxuries,” and without the slightest reference to their intrinsic character. If the validity of this plea must be admitted, still this tax might be levied with what may be styled a becoming heraldic discrimination. For example:--Arms distinguished by “Augmentations of Honour” might be altogether exempted; a higher rate might be fixed in the case of Arms that are ensigned with Coronets, and that display Supporters. Arms borne by unquestionable right, and which are duly recorded at the College, might be rated at a comparatively low charge, certainly not to exceed five shillings a year. On the other hand, all Arms or armorial insignia borne with a very questionable right, or without even the pretence of any right whatever, might be subjected to the ordinary tax for “Armorial Bearings” of their class multiplied (according to circumstances) by four, six, or ten.