Esquire (abbreviated Esq.) is a term of British origin, originally used to denote social status. Within the
United States, it is used as a postnominal honorific by licensed attorneysand by some naval officers and fraternal organizations. Ultimately deriving from the medieval squires who assisted knights, the term came to be used automatically by men of gentle birth. The social rank of Esquire is that above gentleman. More specifically, though, a distinction was made between men of the upper and lower gentry, who were "esquires" and "gentlemen" respectively (between, for example, "Thomas Smith, Esq." and "William Jones, Gent."). A late example of this distinction is in the list of subscribers to "The History of Elton", by the Rev. Rose Fuller Whistler, published in 1882, which clearly distinguishes between subscribers designated "Mr" (another way of indicating gentlemen) and those allowed "Esquire."
Thus, practically speaking, the term "esquire" may be appended to the name of any man not possessing a higher title (such as that of
knighthoodor peerage) or a clerical one. In practice, however, "esquire" in the US is most commonly assumed by lawyersin a professional capacity; it has come to be associated by many Americans solely with the legal profession.Fact|date=August 2008
Regardless of to whom it is applied, the term "Esq." should not be used when talking about oneself, or in directly addressing somebody else. Rather, it is used in third-person contexts, such as business letterhead and when addressing an envelope.
Origins and later British usage
In eras when great importance was attached to social status, tables of precedence were drawn to determine its precise hierarchy. Beginning with royalty and continuing down through officers of state, church dignitaries, the nobility and knights, they invariably concluded with common or garden Esquires and Gentlemen, in that order. (It was presumed that everybody at a social event where precedence was relevant would be at least a gentleman.) Until the 19th century, tables of precedences further distinguished between "esquires by birth" and "esquires by office" (and likewise for "gentlemen").Fact|date=July 2007
But the precise limits of these vague terms were never easy to determine. Some authors attempted to draw up guidelines distinguishing "esquires" from "gentlemen".
According to one typical definition [Burn, Richard; Chitty, J.; Black, Philip (1975, reprint of the 1831 edition) "The Justice of the Peace and Parish Officer", pages 884–885; see also [http://books.google.com/books?id=GI0DAAAAQAAJ] , pages 540–541] , esquires included:
*The eldest sons of
knights, and their eldest sons in perpetual succession
*The eldest sons of younger sons of peers, and their eldest sons in perpetual succession (children of peers already had higher precedence)
*Esquires created by
letters patentor other investiture, and their eldest sons
*Esquires by virtue of their offices, as Justices of the Peace and others who bear any office of trust under the Crown
*Esquires of knights constituted at their investiture
*Persons who are so styled under the Royal sign manual (officers of the Armed Forces of or above the rank of
Captainin the Army or its equivalent)
Barristers (but not Solicitors)
*Holders of a degree at one of the Two Universities (Oxford and Cambridge; note: England only had two universities before 1836).
A slightly later sourceBoutell, Charles (1899) "English Heraldry", page 120; see also [http://books.google.com/books?id=47Qtu3tkmFsC] , page 120] defines the term as
However, formal definitions such as these were proposed because there was, in reality, no fixed criterion distinguishing those designated 'Esquire': it was essentially a matter of impression as to whether a person qualified for this status.
William Segar, Garter King of Arms(the senior officer of armsat the College of Arms), wrote in 1602: "And who so can make proofe, that his Ancestors or himselfe, have had Armes, or can procure them by purchase, may be called Armiger or Esquier." "Honor military, and civill" (1602; lib. 4, cap. 15, p. 228). (By "Armes" he referred to a coat of arms; it is not clear from this quotation whether Segar made a distinction between esquires and gentlemen.)
The breadth of "Esquire" (as "Esq.") had become universal in the
United Kingdomby the late 20th century, for example being applied by some banks to all men who did not have a grander title. Although the College of Armscontinues to restrict use of the word Esquire in official grants of arms to a limited set (smaller even than that outlined by the list above), it uses the term Esquire without restriction in addressing correspondence. Many people in the United Kingdom no longer perceive any distinction between "Mr" and "Esquire" at all and so, for practical purposes and in everyday usage, there is no such distinction.
Although 'Esquire' is the English translation of the French 'Ecuyer', the latter indicated legal membership in the nobilities of "
ancien régime" France and contemporaneous Belgium, whereas an esquire belongs to the British gentryrather than to its nobility.
Modern UK Usage:To be used with the name in initial format - e.g. S.J. Hooper, Esq. - it is still used by many offices of the Chairman in business and also many traditional "
carriage trade" businesses such as Christie's and Berry Bros. & Rudd. This rather old-fashioned usage is generally employed to imply that the addressee would be of the gentry by the mere fact of the sender's interaction when addressing those without another, higher, rank or title. British men invited to Buckingham Palacereceive their invitations in an envelope with the suffix 'Esq' after their names while men of foreign nationalities instead have the prefix 'Mr' (women are addressed as 'Miss', 'Ms', or 'Mrs'). The same practice applies for other post from the palace (e.g. to employees etc.).cite book
last = Hardman
first = Robert
title = Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work
date = 2007-11-29
publisher = Ebury Press
location = Druck, Wemding, Germany
isbn = 978-0-09191-842-2
pages = 121
chapter = Fountain of Honour
quote = British men have 'Esq.' after their name [...] whereas all men from overseas are called 'Mr']
In the United States the suffix "Esq." is most commonly encountered in use among individuals licensed to practice law. [Thompson, Kathryn. [http://abajournal.com/magazine/tussle_over_titles/ Tussle Over Titles] , ABA Journal,
January 2006.] This usage applies to both male and female lawyers. [Jones, Brenda. [http://lawlib.samford.edu/cio/oldcio/ciofeb02.htm#address Forms of Address Including Use of "Esquire"] , "Beeson Law Library Newsletter", Cumberland School of Law, February 2, 2002.] The term "Esquire" is assumed by the legal profession, and has not been awarded to it by any government or authority. There are no legal or regulatory requirements for the use of the suffix "Esq." in the United States, and therefore anyone may technically use it. However, deceptive use of the term to imply credentials one does not possess may be subject to litigation.
As a matter of custom, the suffix "Esq." is not used when referring to sitting
judges, who are "members of the bench" rather than "members of the bar", and are prohibited from practicing law in most United States jurisdictions. Judges will generally assume the prefix " The Honorable" (abbreviated Hon.) as a title of respect.
These legal associations in America, although strong, have not completely blotted out the unmarked use of "esquire" in the modern British fashion, as an honorific simply an alternative to "
Mister" (Mr.). In some states, however, using the term deceptively — in a manner that might lead others to assume you are licensed to practice law in that state — can be used as evidence of unauthorized practice of law. Ex. Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona, Rule 31(a)(2)(B)(2).] The term is also traditionally used when addressing naval officers in formal correspondence.
The form of address "Esq." is not used in the first person. It is used only when the reference is in the third person, such as addressing an envelope, making a formal introduction, or on business letterhead. "Esq." is never used with any prenominal form of address, such as Dr.,
Mr., or Ms.. Thus, "John Smith, Esq." or "Mr. John Smith" would be correct, but "Mr. John Smith, Esq." would be incorrect. [ [http://www.emilypost.com/everyday/forms_of_address.htm Everyday Etiquette] , The Emily Post Institute, last accessed September 18, 2008.]
When addressing a person who has an academic degree or other post-nominal professional designation, such as a
Certified Public Accountant, a writer may use the post-nominal designation "after" the "Esq." For example, an attorney who is also an accountant could be addressed as "James A. Smith, Esq., CPA." Likewise, an attorney who is a Doctor of Medicinecould be styled as "Dr. Jane Kelly," or "Jane Kelly, Esq., M.D.," or, if a holder of both degrees — some states do not require attorneys to hold a J.D. degree in order to practice law — "Jane Kelly, M.D., J.D.," when referred to in the third person, but "never" "Dr. Jane Kelly, Esq." [ [http://emilypost.com/everyday/Forms_of_Address_Chart.pdf Forms of address chart.xls ] ]
Some fraternal groups use the title of "Esquire." The
Benevolent and Protective Order of Elksuses the title of "Esquire" for an appointed office position [ [http://austinelks.com/esquire.html Austin Lodge No 201 BPOE 2007-2008 Committees ] ] . One appendant body in Freemasonry also uses "Esquire" as a degree title [ [http://www.kingsolomonslodge.org/freemasonry/york-allied.php York Rite Allied Invitational Bodies ] ] .
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.