Hmgnattotts anti Begratiattons.

It was originally intended that certain of the Knights Companions should, fromtime to time, be elected into the Order of the Garter, and power is expresslyreserved to them to Resign the Ensigns of the Bath previously to that promo-tion. The nineteenth Article of the Statutes states, that “ Whereas, by theStatutes of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, it is ordained, that none shallbe elected and chosen to be a Fellow and Companion thereof, except that he bea Knight without reproach; We do hereby declare and ordain, for the greatlove, favour, and confidence, We bear towards the Knights of the Most Honour-able Order of the Bath, that from henceforth a special regard shall be had, inpreferring, advancing, and presenting them to be Companions of the MostNoble Order of the Garter;” 1 and the twentieth Article provides, “that when-ever any Companion of this Most Honourable Order shall be elected into theMost Noble Order of the Garter, it shall be entirely in the power of such Com-panion to Resign this Order by an instrument under his hand, to be entered inthe Register of this Order; or, if he shall design to retain this Order, he shallmake the previous protestations usual in cases of the acceptance of anotherOrder.” 2

Between 1725, and January 1815, eight Knights Companions were electedinto the Garter, namely, the Duke of Richmond and Sir Robert Walpole in1726, the Duke of Cumberland in 1730, the Earl of Wilmington in 1733,the Duke of St. Albans in 1741, the Earl of Albemarle in 1749, the Duke ofYork in 1771, and the Marquess of Wellington in 1813, all of whom, exceptthe Dukes of Cumberland and York, Resigned the Order of the Bath; but in1815, it ceased to be understood that a Knight of the Bath was to Resign itsEnsigns on being appointed to any other British Order; and there are now

1 Vide p. 64, antea.

2 Ibid.