As to the latter, a curious error has obtained credence. We often, at this day, see them written of, and hear them spoken of, as Nobles. " Lord Philipse " and " Lord Pell " are familiar examples of this ridiculous blunder in Westchester County. No grant of a feudal manor in England at any time from their first introduction ever carried with it a title,' and much less did any grant of a New York freehold manor ever do so. Both related to land only. The term Lord of a Manor is a technical one, and means simply the owner, -- the possessor,-- of a manor, nothing more. Its use as a title is simply a work of intense, or ignorant, republican provincialism. " Lord " as a prefix to a manor owner's name was never used in England, nor in the Province of New York.*

The origin, nature, existence and continuance ot the Manors of New York, and the reason why they could be erected by the English Sovereigns here, when those Sovereigns could not do so in England since 1690, was so fully, thoroughly and learnedly set forth, more than thirty years ago, in an opinion by one of the greatest chief justices who ever graced the State of New York, that no apology is necessary for giving it in his own language : " The grantees are authorized in terms to hold a court-leet and a courtbaron, to award fines, have the customary writs, etc., to have the waifs and estrays, deodands, etc., and the patronage of any churches to be erected on the tract; and the freeholders of the manor are empowered to electa representative to sit in the General Assembly in the Province of New York. [This '^privilege" was granted only to the three manors of Cortlandt, Livingsston and Rensselaerswyck, and the Borough totrns of West Chester and Schenectadij'].