Quelltext der Seite Calendar (New Style) Act 1750

{{Short description|The Act of Parliament by which Great Britain and its empire adopted the Gregorian calendar}}
{{good article}}
{{EngvarB|date=October 2020}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2020}}
{{Infobox UK legislation
|short_title =Calendar (New Style) Act 1750
|parliament =Parliament of Great Britain
|long_title =An act for regulating the commencement of the year; and for correcting the calendar now in use
|year =1750
|statute_book_chapter=24 Geo. 2 c. 23
|introduced_by =[[Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield|Lord Chesterfield]]
|territorial_extent ="In and throughout all his Majesty's dominions and countries in Europe, Asia, Africa, and America"<br>Territorial extent of (original) subsequent repeals (to (i.e., after) the [[Anniversary Days Observance Act 1859]]): [[England and Wales]], [[Scotland]]
|royal_assent =27 May 1751
|commencement =1 January 1752
|repeal_date = 
|amendments =Calendar Act 1752, [[Anniversary Days Observance Act 1859]], [[Statute Law Revision Act 1948]], [[Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1971]], [[Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1986]]
|related_legislation =
|repealing_legislation=
|status =Amended
|original_text = https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/British_Calendar_Act_of_1751
|use_new_UK-LEG =yes
}}
<!--          Per [[WP:LEADCITE]], it is by choice that there are no citations in the lead. 
              These are to be found in the corresponding material in the body of the article.                -->
The '''Calendar (New Style) Act 1750''' (24&nbsp;Geo.&nbsp;II&nbsp;c.23), '''"An act for regulating the commencement of the year; and for correcting the calendar now in use"''', also known as '''Chesterfield's Act''' or (in American usage) the '''British Calendar Act of 1751''', is an [[Act of Parliament|act]] of the [[Parliament of Great Britain]]. Its purpose was for [[Great Britain]] and the [[British Empire#"First" British Empire (1707–1783)|British Empire]] to adopt the [[Gregorian calendar]] (in effect).{{efn|name=Gregory}}  The Act also rectified other dating anomalies, such as changing the start of the legal year from 25{{nbsp}}March to 1{{nbsp}}January.{{efn|except in Scotland which had already changed to 1{{nbsp}}January, starting in 1600.}}  

The Act [[wikt:elide|elide]]d eleven days from September 1752. It ordered that religious [[feast days]] be held on their traditional dates—for example, Christmas Day remained on 25&nbsp;December. (Easter is a [[moveable feast]]: the Act specifies how its date should be calculated.) It ordered that civil and market days be moved forward in the calendar by eleven days—for example the [[quarter days]] on which rent was due, salaries paid and new labour contracts agreed—so that no-one should gain or lose by the change and that markets match the agricultural season; it is for this reason that the UK tax year ends on 5&nbsp;April, being eleven days on from the original quarter day of 25&nbsp;March.

==Provisions==
In summary, the Act has three key elements:

* It acknowledges the practical difficulties created for England by its traditional practice of beginning the year on 25&nbsp;March, when common practice among its people,{{efn|name=Pepys}} as well as legal and common usage in Scotland (since 1600) and most of Europe, was to begin the year on 1&nbsp;January. Accordingly, the Act provided that "all His Majesty's Dominions" would cease this tradition from the end of December 1751, such that the following day would be 1&nbsp;January 1752.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n218/mode/1up {{lang|la|CAP. XXIII}} (pp. 186, 187)]}}

* It acknowledges that the [[Julian calendar]] still in use in Great Britain and its Dominions had been found to be inaccurate, and that most of Europe had [[adoption of the Gregorian calendar|already adopted]] an (unnamed) revised calendar.{{efn|name=Gregory|The Act makes no reference to Pope Gregory, since to do so might imply recognition of [[Papal primacy]]. It defined a calendar identical to the Gregorian system, from the same first principles. For more background, see section [[#Calculation of the date of Easter: the Computus]].}} The Julian calendar was eleven days ahead of this 'New Style' calendar. With this Act, therefore, Britain adopted the Gregorian calendar (implicitly but not explicitly). To do so, it ordered that eleven days be removed from September 1752 and that [[wikt:centennial|centennial]] years no longer be leap years unless divisible by 400.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n218/mode/1up pp. 186{{ndash}}189]}}

* An annex to the Act gives a method to [[computus|calculate the dates of Easter]] by varying slightly [[Computus#British Calendar Act and Book of Common Prayer|the traditional method]] of the [[Church of England]] (rather than by adopting [[Computus#Gregorian calendar|the method]] of [[Pope Gregory&nbsp;XIII]]).{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n237/mode/1up p. 205]}}

The Act also provides that fixed religious [[feast day]]s continue to be observed on the same calendar date, whereas movable feasts (whose dates depend on the date of Easter) would follow from the new rules for its calculation.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n221/mode/1up p. 189]}} Religious feast days were to be held to their nominal dates (for example [[Michaelmas]], on 29&nbsp;September), but the Act also requires that the dates of 'fairs and marts' traditionally associated with those feasts (but in reality tied to the seasons), be moved in the calendar by discounting eleven days.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n222/mode/1up p. 190]}} Thus, for example, the Michaelmas [[hiring and mop fairs]] moved to 10&nbsp;October and became known as [[Michaelmas#Old Michaelmas Day|Old Michaelmas Day]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Old Michaelmas Day |url=http://projectbritain.com/calendar/October/10.html |access-date=19 March 2021 |website=ProjectBritain.com}}</ref> Christmas Day was still celebrated on 25&nbsp;December and an '[[Old Christmas]]' was not formalised: nevertheless, some communities were [[#Religious dissent|reluctant to accept]] the change.<ref name=Dawson />  

The Act includes various measures to prevent injustice and other problems. For example, Section&nbsp;VI, echoing a rule in Gregory's reform, provides that the date on which rents and other debts are due must be deferred by 11&nbsp;days.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n223/mode/1up p. 191]}} In addition, the same Section says a person does not reach a particular age, including especially the [[age of majority]] (21), until the complete number of years have passed.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n223/mode/1up p. 191]}}

In addition, the Act finally settles the position of [[leap day]] in [[English law]] as 29&nbsp;February.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n226/mode/1up p. 194]}}{{efn|Some authorities had continued to follow the [[February 29#Julian reform|Roman calendar method]] of inserting the leap day between 24&nbsp;February and 25&nbsp;February, then ignoring it for legal purposes. Henry III of England's {{lang|la|Statute De Anno et Die Bissextili}} ({{transl|la|Statute concerning [the] leap year and leap day}}) of 1236 instructed magistrates to ignore the leap day when persons were being ordered to appear before the court within a year.<ref name="Bissextili">{{Cite web |title=DE ANNO BISSEXTILI |url=https://dictionary.thelaw.com/de-anno-bissextili/ |access-date=24 November 2020 |website=The Law Network}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |title=The Statutes at Large; from Magna Charta to the end of the Reign of King Henry the Sixth |year=1769 |editor-last=Owen Ruffhead |volume=1 |page=20 |chapter=The Statute ''De Anno et Die Bissextili, Anno 1236'' (21 Hen III c.12) |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/statutesatlargef01grea/page/20/mode/1up}}</ref> The famous lawyer Sir [[Edward Coke]] (1552–1634) cites it in his ''[[Institutes of the Lawes of England]]''.<ref>{{Cite book |last=[[Edward Coke]] |title=First Part of the [[Institutes of the Lawes of England]] |date=1628 |page=8 left [30] |chapter=Cap. 1, ''Of Fee Simple.'' |quote=... and by (b) the statute {{lang|la|de anno bissextili}}, it is provided, {{lang |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/firstpartofinsti011628coke/page/2/mode/1up |la |quod computentur dies ille excrescens et dies proxime præcedens pro unico dii}}, ({{transl |la |so as in computation that day [[wiktionary:excrescent |excrescent]] is not accounted.}})}}</ref> It is beyond the scope of this article to determine when the custom changed but the 1662 edition of the ''Book of Common Prayer'' shows leap day as 29 February.<ref name=Baskerville />}}

==Background and context==
=== New Year's Day ===
[[File:Memorial to John Etty (18373251064).jpg|thumb|upright|A [[Funerary art#Christianity|memorial plaque]].{{efn|The memorial is to a John Etty and is in [[All Saints' Church, North Street, York]]}} The date of death is given as 28&nbsp;January&nbsp;{{sfrac|170|8|9}} | alt= A memorial plaque giving the date of John Etty's death in January as both 1708 and 1709.]]
Since 1155, the legal New Year's Day in England had been [[March 25|25&nbsp;March]].{{sfn|Bond|1875|p=91}} The introduction to the Act states succinctly the rationale for a change to the start of the year in England (and Wales) to 1&nbsp;January.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n218/mode/1up {{lang|la|CAP. XXIII}} (p. 186)]}} The March date had been found to have many inconveniences. It differed from the date (1&nbsp;January) used by Scotland, other neighbouring countries, and by ordinary people throughout the kingdom.{{efn|name=Pepys|For example see {{Cite web |last=Pepys |first=Samuel |title=Tuesday 31 December 1661 |url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Diary_of_Samuel_Pepys/1661/December#31st |quote="I sat down to end my journell for this year, ..."}} (The [[Diary of Samuel Pepys]])}} As a consequence, it says, frequent mistakes were made in the dates of deeds and other writings.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n218/mode/1up {{lang|la|CAP. XXIII}} (p. 186)]}}{{efn|For example, between 25&nbsp;March and 31&nbsp;December 1719 inclusive, the dates under the two systems for beginning the year are the same. But dates falling between 1&nbsp;January and 24&nbsp;March inclusive are not: 2&nbsp;February 1719 in the year beginning 25&nbsp;March 1719 (as in England) is the same day as 2&nbsp;February 1720 in a year beginning on 1&nbsp;January (as in Scotland).}}

In his biographies of the Caesars, [[Suetonius]] wrote the Julian calendar, introduced by [[Julius Caesar]] in {{auc|45|BC}}, continued the old Roman practice of beginning the year with January.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Suetonius on Julius Caesar's calendar reform, chapter 40 |url=https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0132%3Alife%3Djul.%3Achapter%3D40 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160413214401/http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0132%3Alife%3Djul.%3Achapter%3D40 |archive-date=13 April 2016 |access-date=10 November 2020 |publisher=[[Perseus Digital Library]] at [[Tufts University]]}}</ref> Later Christians felt 1&nbsp;January had no religious significance and wanted to begin the year on a more appropriate date.{{sfn|C R Cheney|1945|loc=Chapter 1, Section IV}} No civil legislation or religious [[canon law]] ordered this change, but Christmas Day, 25&nbsp;December, gradually became popular in England from the 6th&nbsp;century.<ref name="Sizes">{{Cite web |date=8 May 2004 |title=New Year's Day: Julian and Gregorian Calendars |url=https://www.sizes.com/time/year_new_year.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160405230715/http://sizes.com/time/year_new_year.htm |archive-date=5 April 2016 |access-date=7 January 2021 |website=Sizes.com}}</ref> In 1067, New Year's Day reverted to 1&nbsp;January, but in 1155 it was changed to 25&nbsp;March,{{efn|25 March is the [[Feast of the Annunciation]]:  Christians believe that this is the moment when Jesus was conceived.}} where it remained until changed by this Act.{{sfn|Bond|1875|page=91}} It is the continuation of the Roman calendar layout beginning with January that eventually led European countries in the 16th&nbsp;century to return to a year start on 1&nbsp;January. Examples include the Venetian Republic (1522, sixty years before the Gregorian reform), France (1564) and Scotland (1600).<ref name=Sizes /> By 1750 most of Europe had already made this change and the continuing English practice became a source of confusion for English merchants and diplomats and their counterparts, when dealing across [[English Channel|the Channel]] or with Scotland.{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=211}} 

An informal system of '[[dual dating]]' had developed to help reduce confusion.{{efn|[[Benjamin Woolley]], writing in his biography of Elizabethan mathematician [[John Dee (mathematician)|John Dee]] (1527{{ndash}}1608/9), notes that immediately after 1582 [[English people|English]] letter writers "customarily" used "two dates" on their letters.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Woolley |first=Benjamin |title=The Queen's Conjurer: The science and magic of Dr. John Dee, adviser to Queen Elizabeth I |publisher=[[Henry Holt and Company]] |year=2001 |isbn=9780805065107 |location=New York |page=173 |author-link=Benjamin Woolley}}</ref>}} For example, a date written as 21&nbsp;January 1719/20 (or {{sfrac|17|19|20}}) means both a date of 21&nbsp;January 1719 (where the year began ten months earlier, on 25&nbsp;March 1719, as in England) ''and'' a date of 21&nbsp;January 1720 (where the year began three weeks earlier, on 1&nbsp;January 1720, as in Scotland). These notations both refer to the same day in the real world.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Spathaky |first=Mike |title=Old Style New Style dates and the change to the Gregorian calendar |url=http://www.cree.name/genuki/dates.htm |access-date=19 March 2021}}</ref>

The Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 removed this difficulty by changing the start of the year to 1&nbsp;January for England and Wales and the colonies.{{efn|The choice of the start of the year was a separate issue from the choice of calendar. Scotland changed to a 1&nbsp;January start in 1600 but continued to use the Julian calendar for another 152 years. Until 1752, England kept a 25&nbsp;March start and also used the Julian calendar. The applicability of the Act to Ireland and the Isle of Man is discussed below.}} The change applied "after the last day of December 1751".{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n219/mode/1up (p. 187)]}}{{efn|This form of words was required because, absent the Act, the next day{{snd}}1&nbsp;January{{snd}} would also be 1751.}} The legal year which began on 25&nbsp;March 1751 became a short year of 282 days, running from 25&nbsp;March 1751 to 31&nbsp;December 1751. The following year began as 1&nbsp;January 1752 ([[Old Style and New Style dates|New Style]]).<ref>{{Cite web |series={{lang|ga|Stair na hÉireann}} {{!}} History of Ireland |date=2 September 2020 |title=#OTD in 1752 – The Gregorian calendar is adopted in Ireland and Britain |url=https://stairnaheireann.net/2020/09/02/otd-in-1752-the-gregorian-calendar-is-adopted-in-ireland-and-britain-170-years-after-mainland-europe-2-september-is-followed-by-14-september-4/ |access-date=19 March 2021}}</ref>

=== The eleven day shift ===
{{main|Gregorian calendar|Adoption of the Gregorian calendar}}
[[File:Inter-grav.jpg|thumb|upright|First page of the [[papal bull]] {{lang|la|[[Inter gravissimas]]}} ("Among the most serious ...") | alt=An image of the papal bull or bulletin. A machine-readable version is available at that article.]]
The reason given to discard both the traditional calendar and the eleven-day accumulated difference was a religious one: calculation of the date of Easter. The introduction to the Act explains that, due to [[Gregorian calendar#Gregorian reform|the inaccuracy]] in the Julian calendar, the date of the [[March equinox|spring equinox]] (which determines the date of Easter) had drifted by about eleven days from its date at the time of the [[First Council of Nicaea]], 21&nbsp;March,{{efn|The Act gives the name of this Council incorrectly as "[[Nice]]"}} and that this drift would continue unless the calendar was corrected and the eleven days' difference deleted.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n218/mode/1up pp. 186{{ndash}}189]}}

The Gregorian calendar was a reform of the Julian calendar, instituted by [[Pope Gregory XIII]] in 1582 by the [[papal bull]] "{{lang|la|[[Inter gravissimas]]}}" ("{{transl|la|Among the most serious}}"). The intention expressed by the text of this bull was to reset the calendar so that celestial events critical for the calculation of Easter dates—the March equinox and its adjacent full moons—would be back in what the bull calls "their proper places" and would be prevented from being moved away again. The divergence had happened because the Julian calendar adds a leap year every four years, but this process adds about three more days every four hundred years than the earth's orbit requires. By 1582, the error had accumulated to the extent that the calendar date of the spring equinox had moved from 21&nbsp;March by about ten days.<ref>{{Cite conference |last=Moyer |first=Gordon |year=1983 |editor-last=Coyne |editor-first=G. V. |editor2-last=Hoskin |editor2-first=M. A. |editor3-last=Pedersen |editor3-first=O. |title=Aloisius Lilius and the ''Compendium Novae Rationis Restituendi Kalendarium'' |url=http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?journal=grc..&year=1983&volume=book&page_ind=181 |conference=Gregorian Reform of the Calendar: Proceedings of the Vatican Conference to Commemorate its 400th Anniversary |location=Vatican City |publisher=Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Specolo Vaticano |pages=171–188}}</ref>{{efn|Because 1600 was a leap year according to both calendars, the accumulated error reached eleven days (not twelve) by 1750, due to the Julian-only leap year in 1700}} 

Gregory's reform removed ten days from the Julian calendar, thus resetting 21&nbsp;March to coincide with the equinox.{{sfn|C R Cheney|1945|loc=Chapter 1, Section VII}} The reform also provided a new method for calculating leap years so that the error would not recur. Under the Julian calendar a leap year fell every four years when the year was evenly divisible by four. The second part of Gregory's  change declared that a centennial year would not be a leap year unless it was further evenly divisible by 400: Section&nbsp;II of the Act replicates this algorithm. By 1750, [[adoption of the Gregorian calendar#Adoption in Protestant countries|almost all]] countries in [[Western Christendom]] except Britain and its empire had already adopted Gregory's reform.{{sfn|Bond|1875|page=91{{ndash}}101}} 

According to Gregory's rule, the year 1600 was a leap year, but 1700 was not—but it remained a leap year under the Julian calendar. This meant that when Britain reformed the calendar in the 1750s, the divergence between the calendars had reached eleven days. Section&nbsp;I of the Act corrects this divergence by providing that Wednesday, 2&nbsp;September 1752 be followed by Thursday, 14&nbsp;September 1752.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n218/mode/1up pp. 186{{ndash}}189]}}

=== Calculation of the date of Easter: the Computus ===
{{main|Computus}}
The Annex to the Act gives the [[algorithm]] (formally, 'the Computus') to be used thereafter in the [[Church of England]]'s ''[[Book of Common Prayer]]'' to establish the date of Easter: this replaced [[Computus#British Calendar Act and Book of Common Prayer|the previous rules]]  used by the Church. However, with the potential for religious strife in mind, the promoters of the [[Bill (law)|Bill]] downplayed the Roman Catholic connection. The [[Parliamentary counsel|Parliamentary drafters]] of the Act, and of the associated text to revise the ''Book of Common Prayer'', were careful to minimise the impact on religious sensitivities by expressing the revision in terms consistent with the traditional method of the Church of England.{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=112}} They had reason to be cautious: the Government of [[Elizabeth I of England|Elizabeth&nbsp;I]] had first attempted to reform the calendar in 1583/1584, but the Anglican hierarchy of the day rejected the proposal because of its Popish origins.{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=106}} Again, when Sir [[Isaac Newton]] renewed the campaign to correct the calendar in 1699, his proposal foundered on doctrinal objections.{{sfn|Poole|1995|pages=108, 109}}<ref>{{Cite journal |year=2003 |title=Popes, astrologers and Early modern calendar reform |journal=History Has Many Voices |publisher=Pennsylvania State University Press |volume=63 |page=176 |doi=10.5325/j.ctv1c9hn8h |isbn=9780271090931 |jstor=10.5325/j.ctv1c9hn8h |author-first1=F. J. |author-last1=Baumgartner |editor=Lee Palmer Wandel}}</ref> The Annex established a [[computus|computation for the date of Easter]] that achieved the same result as Gregory's rules, without actually referring to him.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n221/mode/1up p. 189]}} The [[algorithm]], set out in the ''Book of Common Prayer'' as required by the Act, includes calculation of the [[golden numbers|Golden Number]] and the [[Dominical Letter|Sunday Letter]] needed for the Anglican method. The Annex includes the definition: "''Easter-day'' (on which the rest depend) is always the first ''Sunday'' after the ''Full Moon'', which happens upon, or next after the Twenty-first Day of ''March''. And if the ''Full Moon'' happens upon a ''Sunday'', ''Easter-day'' is the ''Sunday'' after".{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n237/mode/1up p. 205]}} The Annex uses the terms '[[Paschal Full Moon]]' and '[[Ecclesiastical full moon|Ecclesiastical Full Moon]]', making it clear that they only approximate to the real [[full moon]].{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n241/mode/1up p. 209]}}

In his ''The Book of Almanacs'' (1851) [[Augustus de Morgan]] (Professor of Mathematics at [[University College, London]]), commented on the definition of Easter in the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750. He noted that the body of the Act wrongly stated the way Easter was calculated, but that the annexed Tables correctly set out the dates for Easter as prescribed by Pope Gregory.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Augustus de Morgan |url=https://archive.org/details/bookofalmanacswi00demorich |title=The Book of Almanacs |year=1851 |page=viii (Introduction) |quote=The description copied into prayer-books from the Act of Parliament for the change of style is incorrect in two points: it substitutes the day of full moon for the fourteenth day, and the moon of the heavens for the calendar moon. But the details thus wrongly headed are, as intended, true copies of the Gregorian calendar. |author-link=Augustus de Morgan |via=Archive.org}}</ref>

===Leap day===
{{main|Leap year#Julian calendar}}
Until the [[Book of Common Prayer#1662|1662 edition]] of the ''Book of Common Prayer'', England followed the practice of the early Julian calendar period of creating a leap day by having two successive days numbered 24&nbsp;February.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Campion |first=Rev W M |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XfReAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA31 |title=The Prayer Book interleaved |last2=Beamont |first2=Rev W J |date=1870 |location=London |page=31 |quote=Before the Reformation St Matthias' day was kept in Leap-year, on Feb. 25th. In the Prayer-book of 1549 we read 'This is also to be noted, concerning the Leap-years, that the 25th day of February, which in Leap-years is counted for two days, shall in those two days alter neither Psalm nor lesson; but the same Psalms and Lessons which be said the first day, shall also serve for the second day'." Wheatly thinks that this alteration was made in order that the Holy day might always be kept on the 24th. In the Calendar put forth in 1561 the old practice was resumed, and the following rule which was inserted in the Prayer-book of 1604, was promulgated: "When the year of our Lord may be divided into four even parts, which is every fourth year, then the Sunday letter leapeth, and that year the Psalms and Lessons which serve for the 23rd day of February, shall be read again the day following, except it be Sunday, which hath Proper Lessons of the Old Testament, appointed in the Table serving to that purpose." In 1662, the [[Intercalation (timekeeping)|intercalary]] day was made the 29th of February so that St Matthias now must always be kept on the 24th. |access-date=7 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155821/https://books.google.com/books?id=XfReAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA31 |archive-date=23 January 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref> The ''Book of Common Prayer'' (1662) included a calendar which used entirely consecutive day counting and showed leap day as falling on 29&nbsp;February.<ref name="Baskerville">{{Cite book |last=Church of England |url=https://archive.org/details/bookcommonpraye00chur/page/n25/mode/1up |title=Book of Common Prayer |publisher=[[John Baskerville]] |year=1762 |location=Cambridge |orig-year=1662 |via=[[Archive.org]]}}</ref>

Section&nbsp;II of the Calendar (New Style) Act contains the new Gregorian rule for determining leap years in the future and also makes it quite clear that leap years contain 366 days.{{efn|"... shall for the future, and in all Times to come, be esteemed and taken to be [[wikt:bissextile|Bissextile]] or Leap Years, consisting of three hundred and sixty six Days, in the same Sort and Manner as is now used with respect to every fourth Year of Our Lord".{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n226/mode/1up p. 189]}}}} In addition, the calendar at the end of this Act confirms that leap day falls on [[29&nbsp;February]].{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n226/mode/1up p. 194]}}

==Passage through Parliament==
[[file:Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield.PNG|thumb|upright|Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield | alt=A portrait painting of the Earl of Chesterfield, wearing clothes typical of a mid-eighteenth century British aristocrat.]]
Today, a major reform of this kind would be a government [[bill (law)|bill]], but this was a [[Private Member's Bill]],{{sfn|Poole|1998|page=113}} proposed in the [[House of Lords]] on 25&nbsp;February 1750 [8&nbsp;March 1751 Gregorian] by [[Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield]].{{sfn|Chesterfield|1751|loc=letter CXXXII, page 193}} The proposition was seconded in detail by [[George Parker, 2nd Earl of Macclesfield|Lord Macclesfield]],<ref name="Cobbett">{{Cite book |title=The Parliamentary History of England from the earliest period to the year 1803 [...] the Parliamentary debates |date=1813 |publisher=R. Bagshaw |others=[[Hansard]] |editor-last=Cobbett |volume=XIV AD 1747 1753 |chapter=Proceedings in the Lords on the Bill for the Commencement of the Year for correcting the Calendar now in use |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kcJQPFgVmrsC&pg=PA979}}  (Debate in House of Lords in 1751 column 979{{ndash}}992)</ref> whom Chesterfield described as one of the greatest mathematicians and astronomers in Europe.{{sfn|Chesterfield|1751|loc=letter CXXXV, page 197}}{{efn|Macclesfield was later to become President of the [[Royal Society]] (1752{{ndash}}1764)}} Macclesfield had contributed the technical knowledge underlying the reform with support from [[Martin Folkes]] (then [[List of presidents of the Royal Society|president of the Royal Society]]) and [[James Bradley]] (the [[astronomer royal]]).{{sfn|Poole|1998|page=114-115}} Bradley devised the revised Easter tables. Peter Davall, a barrister of the [[Middle Temple]], who was also an astronomer and formerly secretary to the Royal Society, drafted the Bill.{{sfn|Poole|1998|page=115}} The [[prime minister]] [[Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle|the Duke of Newcastle]], opposed the Bill and asked Chesterfield to abandon it, but the Government did not block it and the Bill passed in the Lords without further debate.<ref name=Cobbett />

The [[House of Commons]] passed the Bill on 13&nbsp;May&nbsp;[[Old Style and New Style dates|[N.S.]]&nbsp;24&nbsp;May] 1751;<ref>{{Cite web |title=House of Lords Journal Volume 27: May 1751, 11–20 |url=https://www.british-history.ac.uk/lords-jrnl/vol27/pp558-569 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170529050015/http://www.british-history.ac.uk/lords-jrnl/vol27/pp558-569 |archive-date=29 May 2017 |access-date=18 November 2020 |publisher=[[British History Online]] |pages=558–569 |quote=A Message was brought from the House of Commons, by Mr. Grey and others to return the Bill, {{notatypo|intituled}}, "An Act for regulating the Commencement of the Year, and for correcting the Calendar now in Use," and to acquaint this House, that they have agreed to the said Bill, with some Amendments, whereunto they desire their Lordships Concurrence.}}</ref> it received [[royal assent]] on 22&nbsp;May [N.S.&nbsp;2&nbsp;June] 1751.<ref>{{Cite web |title=House of Lords Journal Volume 27: May 1751, 21–30 |url=https://www.british-history.ac.uk/lords-jrnl/vol27/pp569-578 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170529064158/http://www.british-history.ac.uk/lords-jrnl/vol27/pp569-578 |archive-date=29 May 2017 |access-date=18 November 2020 |publisher=British History Online |pages=569–578}} But see heading [[#Date of the Act]] below for the contemporary significance of the date of Royal Assent.</ref>

=== Title of the Act ===
The formal title of the Act is: An act for regulating the commencement of the year; and for correcting the calendar now in use.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n218/mode/1up {{lang|la|CAP. XXIII}} (pp. 186, 187)]}}

It was not the practice in the 18th century to give brief titles to Acts of Parliament, now known as their 'Short Titles'. The old long titles had proved increasingly inconvenient,{{efn|For example, when it became necessary to amend this Act, the name of the Act to do so is "An act to amend an act made in the last session of parliament, ({{notatypo|intituled}}, An act for regulating the commencement of the year, and for correcting the calendar now in use)", with its session and chapter abbreviation given as a margin note.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n400/mode/1up p. 368] }} }} and it later became the custom to give acts informal short titles. The [[Short Titles Act 1896]] regularised this and retrospectively gave short titles to old statutes that were still live.<ref>{{Cite legislation UK |type=act |chapter=14 |act=Short Titles Act 1896 |date=20 September 1896 |year=1896 |access-date=6 November 2020}} First Schedule.</ref> In particular, the 1896 Act conferred the short title Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 on this Act.<ref name="STA-p28">{{Cite web |date=20 September 1896 |title=Short Titles Act 1896 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1896/14/pdfs/ukpga_18960014_en.pdf |access-date=19 March 2021 |page=28}}</ref>

=== Date of the Act ===
It may seem strange to modern readers that the Calendar (New Style) Act has the date of 1750 when Royal Assent was given on 22&nbsp;May 1751. The reason is that, before the [[Acts of Parliament (Commencement) Act 1793]], the date on which a Bill became law was the first day of the Parliamentary Session in which they passed, unless the Act contained a provision to the contrary.<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Statutes at Large : {{lang|la|Anno tricesimo tertio}} George III {{lang|la|Regis}} |year=1794 |editor-last=Pickering |editor-first=Danby |volume=XXXIX |location=Cambridge |pages=32, 33 |chapter=CAP. XIII An act to prevent acts of parliament from taking effect from a time prior to the passing thereof |access-date=29 January 2021 |chapter-url=https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Statutes_at_Large_43_v_From_Magna_charta/XwbC08mcZ-4C?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA32 |url-status=live}} (33 Geo III c.13: "Acts of Parliament (Commencement) Act 1793")</ref>

The calendar reform bill was introduced in the session which began on 17&nbsp;January 1750 Old Style [N.S.{{nbsp}}28&nbsp;January 1751], almost nine months into a year that had begun on 23{{nbsp}}March 1750. Hence the Short Titles Act 1896 assigned the calendar reform to 1750.<ref name="STA-p28" />

==Territorial scope of the Act==
The Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 applied to those countries and dominions in Europe, Asia, Africa, and America that belonged or were subject to the crown of Great Britain.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n218/mode/1up p. 187]}}

===Wales===
After the [[conquest of Wales by Edward&nbsp;I of England]], English law was increasingly applied. Various acts passed by the [[Parliament of England]] between 1535 and 1542 consolidated the combination of England and Wales as a single [[jurisdiction]]. Nevertheless, before the [[Wales and Berwick Act 1746]] (20 Geo. 2, c42) it was often uncertain whether a reference to 'England' in legislation of the London Parliament included Wales. The 1746 Act provided that in all legislation, past and future, the word 'England' was deemed to include Wales and thus the Calendar Act (four years later) applied to Wales, despite it not being named explicitly.<ref>{{cite book |title= The Statutes at Large : FROM THE 20th to the 23rd Year of King George&nbsp;II  | first1=Danby | last1= Pickering |volume = XIV | date=1763 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wa03AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA125 |page=125{{ndash}}126 |chapter = CAP. XLII}} Section III  </ref>{{efn|The 1746 Act was repealed by the  [[Welsh Language Act 1967]] for the future but not the past. From 1967, legislation refers to 'England', 'Wales' or 'England and Wales' as appropriate.}}

=== Scotland ===
{{quote box|{{notatypo|The Kingis Majestie and Lordis of His Secreit Counsall undirstanding that in all utheris weill governit commoun welthis and cuntreyis the first day of the yeir begynis yeirlie upoun the first day of Januare commonlie callit New Yearis Day and that this realme onlie is different fra all utheris in the compt and reckining of the yeiris: ...}} 
| source =   {{lang|la|Ex Regist, Secr. conc. in Archivis Publicis Scotiae.}}{{sfn|Bond|1875|loc=footnote on pages xvii–xviii: original text of the Scottish decree.}}{{efn|This text, written in [[Scots language|Scots]], may be roughly translated as ''His Majesty the King and the Lords of his Privy Council, understanding that in all other well-governed commonwealths and countries the first day of the year begins yearly on the first day of January commonly called New Year's Day and that this Realm is different from all the others in the account and reckoning of the years: ...''}}
| align = right
| width = 33%
}}
As part of the [[Kingdom of Great Britain]] since the [[Acts of Union 1707]], the Act applied equally to Scotland as to England. Scotland had already made part of the change: its calendar year had begun on 1&nbsp;January since 1600.{{sfn|Bond|1875|loc=footnote on pages xvii–xviii: original text of the Scottish decree.}} The example of Continental countries prompted King [[James&nbsp;VI of Scotland]] and his council to make the change, as the Register of the Scottish [[Privy Council]] of 17&nbsp;December 1599 records.<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4qUnAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA63 |title=The Register of the Privy Council of Scotland |year=1884 |editor-last=David Masson |volume=VI |page=63 |access-date=20 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155718/https://books.google.com/books?id=4qUnAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA63 |archive-date=23 January 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Ireland ===

At the time, the [[Kingdom of Ireland]] was a [[Poynings' Law (on certification of acts)|semi-autonomous]] kingdom in a [[personal union]] with the Kingdom of Great Britain. The [[Declaratory Act 1719]] asserted that the Parliament of Great Britain had the right to legislate for Ireland, which was one of His Majesty's Dominions. Nevertheless, in 1782, the [[Parliament of Ireland]] enacted a statute to confirm the application of the 1750 Act to Ireland.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Statutes Passed In the Parliaments Held In Ireland ... From the Third Year of Edward the Second, A.D. 1310 [to the Fortieth Year of George III, A.D. 1800, Inclusive] |year=1794 |volume=VII |location=Dublin |page=156 |chapter=XLVIII |access-date=12 December 2020 |chapter-url=https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101073364992&view=1up&seq=187 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155740/https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101073364992&view=1up&seq=187 |archive-date=23 January 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref> Whatever the {{lang|la|[[de jure]]}} status of the British Act in Ireland, it was applied immediately {{lang|la|[[de facto]]}}, as recorded in the [[wikt:ready reckoner|ready reckoner]] printed in [[George Faulkner|Faulkner's]] ''Dublin Journal'' for 1752.<ref>{{Cite conference |date=April 2006 |title='The Pope's new invention':the introduction of the Gregorian calendar in Ireland, 1583–1782 |conference=Ireland, Rome and the [[Holy See]]: History, Culture and Contact |location=Rome |publisher=History Department, [[University College Cork]] |page=9 |author-first1=Hiram |author-last1=Morgan}}</ref>

===Isle of Man===
In January 1753, the [[Tynwald]], the [[Isle of Man]]'s legislature, passed an Act for regulating the Commencement of the Year, and for establishing the new Calendar now used in England,<ref>{{Cite book |title=Statutes of the Isle of Man |date=1883 |editor-last=Gill |editor-first=J F |volume=1 |page=258}}</ref> now referred to as the Gregorian Calendar Act 1753.<ref>{{Cite web |date=1978 |title=Pre-Revestment Written Laws (Ascertainment) Act 1978 section 2. |url=https://www.legislation.gov.im/cms/images/LEGISLATION/PRINCIPAL/1978/1978-0005/Pre-RevestmentWrittenLawsAscertainmentAct1978_1.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155755/https://www.legislation.gov.im/cms/images/LEGISLATION/PRINCIPAL/1978/1978-0005/Pre-RevestmentWrittenLawsAscertainmentAct1978_1.pdf |archive-date=23 January 2021 |access-date=24 December 2020 |publisher=Government of the Isle of Man}}</ref><ref name="Tynwald 1753">{{Cite web |date=1753 |title=Gregorian Calendar Act 1753 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.im/cms/images/LEGISLATION/PRINCIPAL/1753/1753-0001/GregorianCalendarAct1753_1.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190712170356/http://www.legislation.gov.im/cms/images/LEGISLATION/PRINCIPAL/1753/1753-0001/GregorianCalendarAct1753_1.pdf |archive-date=12 July 2019 |access-date=24 December 2020 |publisher=Tynwald}}</ref> The Act recited the Island had observed the calendar established by the British Act since 1&nbsp;January 1752 and made provision in similar terms to the British Act. The Act was promulgated and became law, with retrospective effect, on 5&nbsp;July 1753. One of its permanent effects was to postpone the holding of the annual sitting of Tynwald at [[St John's, Isle of Man|St John's]], at which [[Act of Tynwald|Acts of Tynwald]] were and still are promulgated, from 24&nbsp;June ([[Nativity of Saint John the Baptist|the feast of St John the Baptist]]) to 5&nbsp;July.<ref name="Tynwald 1753" />{{rp|section 11}}

=== America ===
{{anchor|United States}}
The Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 applied to Britain's American colonies: the north-eastern states of the present day [[United States]] and part of [[Canada]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Mark M Smith |date=October 1998 |title=Culture, Commerce and Calendar Reform in Colonial America |journal=The William and Mary Quarterly |volume=55 |pages=557–584 |doi=10.2307/2674445 |jstor=2674445 |number=4}}</ref> Some British law, including the 1750 Act, is still applicable in some US states because when American independence was declared in 1776, it was not practical for these former colonies to create an entirely new body of American law to replace British law. The practical solution adopted was [[Reception statute#United States|to continue to apply British law as it stood in 1776]] but subject to the proviso that it could be overridden by any subsequent provision of American law,<ref>{{Cite book |last=Brown |first=Elizabeth Gaspar |url=https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/27/ |title=British Statutes in American Law 1776-1836 |date=1964 |publisher=[[University of Michigan Law School]] |location=Ann Arbor, Michigan |access-date=4 February 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200204163315/https://repository.law.umich.edu/books/27/ |archive-date=4 February 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> and did not conflict with the Constitution and laws of the United States.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Florida Statutes |publisher=State of Florida |chapter=2.01 Common law and certain statutes declared in force. |quote=The common and statute law of England which are of a general and not a local nature ... down to the fourth day of July 1776, are declared to be in force in this state, provided the said statutes and common law be not inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the United States and the acts of the legislature of this state. |access-date=23 January 2021 |chapter-url=http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099/0002/Sections/0002.01.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201028020401/http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0000-0099%2F0002%2FSections%2F0002.01.html |archive-date=28 October 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> 

[[James B. Whitfield|James Bryan Whitfield]], a former [[Florida Supreme Court]] judge, together with others, produced a comprehensive list of the relevant measures in 1941.<ref name=Whitfield>{{Cite web |title=List of British Statutes |url=https://fall.law.fsu.edu/databases/PDF/1941statutoryrevisions.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200204163315/https://fall.law.fsu.edu/databases/PDF/1941statutoryrevisions.pdf |archive-date=4 February 2020 |access-date=4 February 2020 |publisher=[[Florida State University]]}}</ref> This built on earlier work by Missouri. The list includes the key part of the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750.<ref name=Whitfield />

Some states adopted as their common law the laws of England as it was in 1607, predating the 1750 Act.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Benson Reception of the Common Law in Missouri |url=https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3528&context=mlr |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200709140732/https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3528&context=mlr |archive-date=9 July 2020 |access-date=26 August 2020}}</ref>

There is no US federal calendar law.{{sfn|Steel|2001|page=16}}

The Act remains directly in force in Canada as part of [[Canadian law]].<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Calendar |encyclopedia=[[The Canadian Encyclopedia]] |publisher=[[Historica Canada]] |url=https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/calendar |access-date=9 November 2020 |date=November 29, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201027034609/https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/calendar |archive-date=27 October 2020 |author=Robert Douglas |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Question1. What years are leap years? |url=https://nrc.canada.ca/en/certifications-evaluations-standards/canadas-official-time/canadas-official-time-frequently-asked-questions |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155722/https://nrc.canada.ca/en/certifications-evaluations-standards/canadas-official-time/canadas-official-time-frequently-asked-questions |archive-date=23 January 2021 |access-date=6 February 2020 |website=Candada.ca |publisher=[[National Research Council Canada]]}}</ref>

=== Other former British colonies ===

The Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 applies directly or indirectly in other former British colonies. 

Early Australian colonial legislation applied British law.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Australian Courts Act 1828 |url=https://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/resources/transcripts/nsw4_doc_1828.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200322110837/https://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/resources/transcripts/nsw4_doc_1828.pdf |archive-date=22 March 2020 |access-date=9 November 2020 |publisher=Government of Australial |page=31 (original), 9 (transcript) |quote=... and be it further '''enacted''' that all laws and statutes in force within the realm of England at the time of the passing of this act [...] shall be applied in the  administration of justice in the courts of New South Wales and [[Van Diemen's Land]] respectively''...}}</ref> Subsequently, various reviews have considered the relevance of old British statutes. Australian States eventually repealed British statutes but re-enacted those which remained relevant, such as the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750. For example, New South Wales passed the ''Imperial Acts Application Act 1969'', the First Schedule of which repeals various British statutes including the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750.<ref>{{Cite web |date=28 September 2020 |title=Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 No 30, First Schedule |url=https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1969-030#sch.1 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155743/https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1969-030#sch.1 |archive-date=23 January 2021 |access-date=9 November 2020 |publisher=[[Government of New South Wales]]}}</ref> At the same time Section 16 continues the operation of the British Calendar Act by restating key parts and by referring to that Act for the details.<ref>{{Cite web |date=28 September 2020 |title=Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 No 30, Part 3, Division 2 Calendar §16 |url=https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1969-030#pt.3-div.2 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155743/https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1969-030#pt.3-div.2 |archive-date=23 January 2021 |access-date=9 November 2020 |publisher=Government of New South Wales}}</ref> 

New Zealand also passed early legislation at various times applying British law.<ref>{{Cite web |title=English Laws Act 1858 (21 and 22 Victoriae 1858 No 2) |url=http://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/hist_act/ela185821a22v1858n2275/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200131070644/http://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/hist_act/ela185821a22v1858n2275/ |archive-date=31 January 2020 |access-date=9 November 2020 |publisher=[[Government of New Zealand]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=English Laws Act 1908 ~ New Zealand. |url=https://constitutionwatch.com.au/english-laws-act-1908/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201027153340/https://constitutionwatch.com.au/english-laws-act-1908/ |archive-date=27 October 2020 |access-date=9 November 2020 |website=constitutionwatch.com.au}}</ref> In 1988, New Zealand enacted the [[Imperial Laws Application Act 1988]], which disapplied all but a limited schedule of English Acts it declared to be "part of the laws of New Zealand", one of which is the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Imperial Laws Application Act 1988 |url=http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1988/0112/latest/whole.html#DLM135091 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200206160051/http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1988/0112/latest/whole.html#DLM135091 |archive-date=6 February 2020 |access-date=6 February 2020 |publisher=Government of New Zealand}} ''Schedule 1: Imperial enactments in force in New Zealand''.</ref>

===Asia and Africa===
Britain had by this time begun colonising India and parts of Africa—hence the references to Asia and Africa.<ref>{{cite book |first=Niall |last=Ferguson |author-link=Niall Ferguson |title=Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power |publisher=Basic Books |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-465-02329-5 |url = https://archive.org/details/empire00nial | page=19}}</ref>

===Europe===
Apart from Great Britain and Ireland, the only part of Europe under effective British sovereignty was [[Gibraltar]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pincus |first1=Steven |title=Rethinking Mercantilism: Political Economy, The British Empire and the Atlantic World in the 17th and 18th Centuries |journal=Warwick University|pages=7–8 |url=https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/ren/projects/archive/newberry/collaborativeprogramme/ren-earlymod-communities/britishandamericanhistories/25march/session3reading/rethinkingmercantilism.pdf |access-date=10 May 2018}}</ref> However, each session of Parliament began with a recital that the King was [[Style of the British sovereign#Style of the sovereign|also the rightful King of France]].{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n172/mode/1up p. 140]}}{{efn|{{lang-la|Anno Regni GEORGII II Regis Magnæ Britannie Franciæ & Hiberniæ vicesimo quarto }} {{trans|The twenty-fourth year of the reign of George II, Great King of Britain, France and Ireland}} }}

==Reaction and effect==

==="Give us our eleven days!" – the calendar riot myth===
{{anchor|The calendar riot myth}}
[[File:William Hogarth 028.jpg|thumb|right|''[[Humours of an Election|An Election Entertainment]]'' (c.&nbsp;1755), a painting by [[William Hogarth]], which is the main source for "Give us our Eleven Days". | alt= a satirical painting by [[William Hogarth]]. It shows canvassers for the Whig Party relaxing in an inn after an affray outside with their opponents from the Tory Party. On the floor, trampled underfoot, is a Tory campaign poster reading "Give us our Eleven Days"]]
Some history books report rioting in reaction to the calendar change, with people demanding that their 'eleven days' be returned. However, this is very likely a myth, based on just two primary sources{{mdash}}''The World'', a satirical journal of Lord Chesterfield, and ''An Election Entertainment,'' a painting by the satirist [[William Hogarth]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hudson |first=Myles |title=Did a Calendar Change Cause Riots in England? |url=https://www.britannica.com/story/did-a-calendar-change-cause-riots-in-england |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210110141058/https://www.britannica.com/story/did-a-calendar-change-cause-riots-in-england |archive-date=10 January 2021 |access-date=16 January 2021 |series=Britannica Companions |publisher=[[Encyclopedia Britannica]]}}</ref> There are no contemporary records of any such events in the riot depositions at the [[Public Record Office]].{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=101-102}}{{sfn|Steel|2001 |page= 249}}

This is the same Lord Chesterfield who introduced the Bill to the House of Lords. He wrote to his son (without saying which 'numerous assembly' he had in mind), "Every numerous assembly is a mob, let the individuals who compose it be what they will. Mere sense is never to be talked to a mob; their passions, their sentiments, their senses and their seeming interests alone are to be applied to. Understanding have they collectively none."{{sfn|Chesterfield|1751|loc=letter CXXXII, page 193}} 

When the son of the Earl of Macclesfield (who had been influential in passing the Act) stood for [[Parliament of Great Britain|Parliament]] in Oxfordshire as a [[British Whig Party|Whig]] in 1754, dissatisfaction with the calendar reform was one of a number of issues raised by his [[Tory Party|Tory]] opponents. In 1755, Hogarth produced a painting (and an engraved print from the painting) loosely based on these elections, entitled ''[[Humours of an Election|An Election Entertainment]]'', which shows a placard carrying the slogan "Give us our Eleven Days" (on the floor, lower right). In his book ''Hogarth, His Life, Art and Times'' (1993), [[Ronald Paulson]] says of the picture that "the Oxfordshire people&nbsp;... are specifically rioting, as historically the London crowd did, to preserve the 'Eleven Days' the government stole from them in September 1752 by changing the calendar".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Paulson |first=Ronald |url=https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Hogarth_Art_and_politics_1750_1764/2c7L7UvYYgoC?hl=en&pg=PA164 |title=Hogarth: Art and politics, 1750–1764 |publisher=[[Lutterworth Press]] |year=1993 |volume=III |location=Cambridge |author-link=Ronald Paulson |access-date=6 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155811/https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Hogarth_Art_and_politics_1750_1764/2c7L7UvYYgoC?hl=en&pg=PA164 |archive-date=23 January 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref>{{efn| Paulson does not provide any supporting evidence for either of these 'riots'.}}

Thus, the 'calendar riot' fiction was born. The [[1754 British general election|election campaign depicted]] concluded in 1754, after a very lengthy contest between Court Whigs and Jacobite Tories. Every issue between the two factions was brought up, including the question of calendar reform. The Tories attacked the Whigs for every deviation, including their alleged [[Jewish Naturalisation Act 1753|favouritism towards foreign Jews]] and the [[Gregorian calendar|'Popish' calendar]]. Hogarth's placard, part of a satire on the character of the debate, was not an observation of actual crowd behaviour.{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=103}}

===Financial concerns===
{{quote box|
''Three'' Market Days unto the Farmer's lost,<br />
Yet ''three per Cent,'' is added to his Cost:<br />
The Landlord calls for Rent ''before'' 'tis due,<br />
''King's Tax'', and ''Windows, Poor,'' and ''Parson'' too;<br />
With Numbers more, our {{notatypo|Grandsiers}} never knew.<br />
{{notatypo|Domestick}} Servants all will have their Pay,<br />
And force their Masters e're the Quarter Day.<br />
<br />
How shall the Wretch, then glean his Harvest in,<br />
His Cash expended e're he does begin;...<br />
Or how the Miser cram his Bags with Pelf,<br />
If that he don't receive it first himself? 
| source =  ''True Briton'', Bristol, 20 September 1752{{sfn|Poole|1995|p=118}}{{efn|Poole adds a comment that, "The end-point of a rather tortuous argument was that the abatements should have been greater. The journal adopted the New Style and supported the reform, pointing out only that the Gregorian calendar was still slightly inaccurate".{{sfn|Poole|1998|loc= footnote 82, page 118}} }}
| align = right
| width = 25%
}}
There were, however, legitimate concerns lest tax and other payments arise any earlier under the new calendar than they would otherwise have done. Consequently, Provision&nbsp;6 of the Act ('Times of Payment of Rents, Annuities') stipulated that monthly, quarterly or yearly payments would not become due until the days that originally they would have done had the Julian calendar continued{{mdash}}that is, due dates were deferred by eleven days.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Calendar (New Style) Act 1750, Section 6 |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/apgb/Geo2/24/23/section/6 |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200921181124/https://www.legislation.gov.uk/apgb/Geo2/24/23/section/6 |archive-date=21 September 2020 |access-date=10 November 2020 |publisher=Parliament of Great Britain |via=National Archives}}</ref>

The Earl of Macclesfield, in his speech to the House of Lords during the passage of the Bill, said a proportionate reduction in payments had been considered as an alternative solution. That is, maintaining the original payment dates but reducing the amounts due proportionately to reflect the omission of eleven days from the quarter ending on 29&nbsp;September 1752 ([[Michaelmas Day]]). Macclesfield said this idea was abandoned because it would prove more complex than it first appeared.{{sfn|Poole|1998|page=131}} Despite this, the Treasury later considered legislating to over-ride the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 provisions by applying proportionate reductions to government payments of interest, salaries and wages, but the idea was abandoned.{{sfn|Poole|1998|page=131}} Nevertheless, the Treasury realised that outside government a proportionate reduction of wages, rents etc. for the short quarter might be convenient in some cases. Dr [[Robert Poole (historian)|Robert Poole]] writes that the Treasury, "decided that a tidy move to new-style quarter day payments might gradually be achieved at the point where old leases expired and new ones began. Tables of [[wikt:abatement|abatement]]s&nbsp;... for the eleven missing days were included in the official information about the changeover and widely published in the press, [[wikt:almanac|almanac]]s and [[pamphlet|pocket books]]".{{sfn|Poole|1998|page=131}} For example, ''The True Briton'' newspaper of 20&nbsp;September 1752 reported that the reduction was 7[[Penny (British pre-decimal coin)|d]] for each pound or, more precisely, {{frac|7|1|4}}d.<ref>{{Cite news |date=20 September 1752 |title=London |page=118 |work=The True Briton |url=https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_True_Briton/fcMPAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA118 |url-status=live |access-date=8 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155748/https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_True_Briton/fcMPAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA118 |archive-date=23 January 2021}}</ref>{{efn|7.25 [[Penny (British pre-decimal coin)|old pennies]] ('d') in a pound of 240 old pence equals 3.02%; 11 days in a year of 366 days equals 3.01% [both calculations correct to two decimal places]}}

===Religious dissent===
{{see also|Little Christmas}}
As already observed, the authors of the Act were careful to minimise the impact on religious sensitivities by expressing the revision in terms consistent with the traditions of the [[established Church]] of England, given the experience of previous attempts. By the middle of the 18th Century, however, it seems that the climate had changed somewhat. The traditional saints' days like [[Lady Day]], [[Michaelmas]] and [[Martinmas]] had come to mark events in the civil calendar such as fair days, rent days and hiring days far more than they did days of special religious observance. Poole writes, "The religious calendar of the established church continued, but it encompassed a shrinking proportion of the population as [[Nonconformist (Protestantism)|Dissent]] expanded at the expense of Anglicanism, and as parish wakes, feasts and saints' days were themselves disowned by many parish clergy."{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=97}} So the Act explicitly exempted fairs and marts from the calendar reform; "that is, they were to change their nominal date to retain the same place in the season, thus in effect observing the Old Style".{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=122}}

The revision to the ''Book of Common Prayer'' setting the new basis for calculating the date for Easter (and its associated events like [[Lent]]) appears to have passed without public controversy—"perhaps", Poole remarks, "because few people understood how Easter worked anyway".{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=112}} The date of Christmas, however, proved to be a different matter. ''The Gentleman's Magazine and Historical Chronicle,'' 23&nbsp;January 1753, reported that a "vast concourse of people" in [[Somerset]] gathered at the (Christmas-flowering) [[Glastonbury thorn]] on 24&nbsp;December 1752{{nbsp}}(New Style) to test the authenticity of the new date. "[B]ut to their great disappointment, there was no appearance of its [[Flower#Flowering transition|blowing]], which made them watch it narrowly the 5th of Jan. the Christmas-Day, Old-Stile, when it blow'd as usual."{{sfn|Young|1977|page=149}} The vicar of Glastonbury, however, later announced that it had in fact flowered nearer New Christmas Day.{{sfn|Young|1977|page=149}} William Dawson (1902) writes a Reverend Francis Blackburne opened his church on Friday, 5&nbsp;January 1753—(O.S.,&nbsp;25&nbsp;December 1752)—to a congregation which filled the building. "The people were sorely disappointed, however, when the rector did not use the service designated for Christmas Day but instead, like a crusading clergyman of the twentieth century, preached a sermon on the virtue of obeying the Calendar Act."<ref name=Dawson>{{Cite book |last=Dawson |first=William Francis |url=https://ia800301.us.archive.org/0/items/christmasitsorig22042gut/22042.txt |title=Christmas: Its Origin and Associations, Together with Its Historical Events and Festive Celebrations during Nineteen Centuries |year=1902 |location=London |page=237}} cited in Young (1977) page 149</ref>

==Amendments to Calendar (New Style) Act 1750==

===Calendar Act 1751===
<!--            Yes, '1751' even though page 368 of the ''Statutes at Large'' records that it was introduced in 1752. Remember that at that time, statutes were dated according to when the Parliamentary session began, not when the Bill was introduced or when Royal Assent was given. -->
The Calendar Act 1751 (25&nbsp;Geo&nbsp;II&nbsp;c.30) was needed to rectify some unforeseen consequences of the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n400/mode/1up ''Cap. XXX'' (p. 368{{ndash}}370)]}}

Section&nbsp;I of the 1751 Act concerned the legal validity of actions that were due to be executed on the omitted eleven days, 3&nbsp;September to 13&nbsp;September 1752. The Act provided that for 1752 only, those actions would be deemed to be lawful and to have effect on "the same natural days" as if the reform had not taken place.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n400/mode/1up ''Cap. XXX'' (p. 368{{ndash}}370)]}}

Section&nbsp;II addressed calendar dates associated with the opening of common land, the payment of rents, and other matters. Such legal acts as were governed by the dates of movable feasts would thenceforth conform to the dates of those feasts in the revised calendar.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n400/mode/1up ''Cap. XXX'' (p. 368{{ndash}}370)]}}

Section&nbsp;III provided that nothing should abridge, extend, or alter the titles of land.{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n400/mode/1up ''Cap. XXX'' (p. 368{{ndash}}370)]}}

Section&nbsp;IV resolved the date for electing the Mayor of the City of London and also revised an unrelated Act (24&nbsp;Geo&nbsp;II&nbsp;c.48) that had shortened the [[Michaelmas term#The legal year|Michaelmas term]].{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n400/mode/1up ''Cap. XXX'' (p. 368{{ndash}}370)]}}
<!-- 
                              Next sentence re herring fishery suspended because I can't see it in the Act
The 1751 Act also addressed the effect of the revised calendar on the fishing season, extending it to account for what would otherwise have meant the loss of the best part of the [[herring]] catch.                               -->

===25&nbsp;Geo&nbsp;II&nbsp;c.31===
A similar issue was identified shortly afterwards with the date of the "annual election of mayor, sheriffs, treasurers, coroners, and leave-lookers" in [[Chester]] "to avoid the inconvenience which would arise to the citizens, from the alteration of the style bringing the ancient day of election into the fair week."  The issue was resolved by appending a clause to an otherwise irrelevant Act, (25&nbsp;Geo&nbsp;II&nbsp;c.31,{{efn|This Act has no short title, being known simply by its [[Citation of United Kingdom legislation|Citation]], '25&nbsp;Geo&nbsp;II&nbsp;c.31', or by its long title—"An act to amend an act made in the last session of parliament {{notatypo|intituled}} An act to continue, explain and amend several laws more effectually to prevent the spreading of distemper which now rages amongst the horned cattle in this kingdom."{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n403/mode/1up ''Cap. XXXI'' (p. 371)]}} }} concerning [[murrain|distemper]] in cattle) to move its statutory date forward by a week.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Joseph |url=https://archive.org/details/historycityches01hemigoog/page/n290/mode/1up |title=History of the City of Chester, from Its Foundation to the Present Time |year=1831 |page=266 |access-date=8 December 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref>

===Anniversary Days Observance Act 1859===

Section&nbsp;III of the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 required the observation of certain days of political or religious significance. These are listed in a Table headed "Certain Solemn Days for which particular [church] Services are appointed" and are: 5&nbsp;November (the [[Gunpowder Plot]]); 30&nbsp;January ([[Execution of Charles&nbsp;I]]); and 29 May ([[Stuart Restoration|The Restoration]]).{{sfn|Pickering|1765|loc= [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n237/mode/1up Certain solemn days for which particular services are appointed (p. 206)]}}

As part of the development of religious and political toleration, Section&nbsp;I of the [[Anniversary Days Observance Act 1859]] removed from various acts, including the Calendar Act, the obligation to commemorate these days with special church services.<ref>{{cite book|title=A collection of the public general statutes passed in the 22nd year of the reign of Her Majesty Queen Victoria |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ElcMAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA2 |access-date=5 November 2016 |year=1859 |publisher=[[Eyre and Spottiswoode]] |pages=2–3 |chapter=[22 Vict. c.2] An Act to repeal certain Acts and Parts of Acts which relate to the Observance of the Thirtieth of January and other Days}}</ref>

===Easter Act 1928===
{{see also|Reform of the date of Easter}}
The [[Easter Act 1928]] was enacted to permit the date of Easter (as observed by the established church) to be fixed permanently, as the first Sunday after the second Saturday in April.<ref>{{Cite news |date=15 January 2016 |title=Archbishop Justin Welby hopes for fixed Easter date |language=English |publisher=BBC |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35326237 |access-date=8 February 2021}}</ref> An [[Order in Council]] is needed for this act to [[Coming into force|come into force]] and no such order has been made.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Easter Act 1928, s.2, Modification (added note) |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/18-19/35/section/2 |access-date=31 July 2019 |website=legislation.gov.uk |publisher=[[The National Archives (UK)|The National Archives]], UK |quote="Power of appointment conferred by s. 2(2) not exercised"}}</ref> If so ordered, the 1928 Act would replace the table of "Moveable and Immoveable Feasts" in the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Easter Act 1928, s.1, Modification (added note) |url=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/18-19/35/section/1 |access-date=26 March 2021 |website=legislation.gov.uk |publisher=[[The National Archives (UK)|The National Archives]], UK |quote="and section three of the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750, the new calendar, tables and rules annexed to that Act, and section two of the Calendar Act 1751, are hereby amended and shall be read and construed accordingly, ."}}</ref>

===Statute Law Revision Act 1948===

The [[Statute Law Revision Act 1948]] simplified and removed some redundant words from Section&nbsp;VI of the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750, including the reference to the time at which the age of 21, or any other age, is reached. The provision about age could only affect those alive at the time of calendar reform. The 1948 Act also repealed the "Table to find Easter till the Year 1899 inclusive" and the "Table of the Moveable Feasts for Fifty two years". By 1948 these tables had ceased to be relevant and this Act deleted them.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Statute Law Revision Act 1948 |url=https://tarltonapps.law.utexas.edu/rare/documents/Statute_Law_Revision_Act_1948.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155724/https://tarltonapps.law.utexas.edu/rare/documents/Statute_Law_Revision_Act_1948.pdf |archive-date=23 January 2021 |access-date=11 November 2020 |website=tarltonapps.law.utexas.edu |page=1473}}</ref>

===Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1971===

The calendar included in the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 is headed "The Calendar, with the Table of Lessons". For each month the morning and evening prayers are specified. The [[Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1971]] removed the words "with the Table of Lessons" and also all the specified prayers in the Table. The changes followed a Law Commission Report and reflected the views of the Church.<ref>{{Cite report |url=http://www.bailii.org/ew/other/EWLC/1970/37.pdf |title=Statute Law Revision: Third Report (Law Com 37. Command paper 4546). |last=The Law Commission |date=December 1970 |publisher=HMSO |location=London |page=A 4}}</ref>

===Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1986===

Section&nbsp;IV of the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 has provisions about the dates for meetings of courts in Scotland. These were repealed by the [[Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1986]], following a report by the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission.<ref>{{Cite report |url=http://www.bailii.org/ew/other/EWLC/1985/150.pdf |title=Statute Law Revision: Twelfth Report(Law Com 150. SLC 99. Command paper 9648 |last=The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission |date=November 1985 |publisher=HMSO |location=London}}</ref>

== Consequences: why the British income tax year ends on&nbsp;5 April==
{{main|History of taxation in the United Kingdom#Why the United Kingdom income tax year begins on 6 April}}
{{anchor|Why the United Kingdom income tax year begins on 6 April}}
In his 1995 paper on the calendar reform, Dr Poole cites the Treasury Board Papers at the [[The National Archives (United Kingdom)|National Archives]] and explains that, after the omission of eleven days in September 1752, the national accounts carried on being drawn up to the same four quarter days as usual but their dates were moved on by eleven days "so that financial transactions should run their full natural term" (and thus Lady Day on 25&nbsp;March Old Style became 5&nbsp;April New Style).{{sfn|Poole|1995|page=117}} 
<!--
              Please do not add the myth that an extra day was added on the Julian leap year, 1800. 
              This is factually incorrect (as explained above) and there is no contemporary evidence to support it. 
              For a more detailed explanation, see the main 'History of Taxation' article in the {{main:...}} link.
-->

==See also==
* [[Old Style and New Style dates]]
* [[cal (command)#Quirks (1752)]]

==Notes==
{{Notelist|group=lower-alpha}}

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==Sources==
{{refbegin}}
* {{Cite book |last=Bond |first=John James |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=b2wBAAAAQAAJ |title=Handy Book of Rules and Tables for Verifying Dates With the Christian Era Giving an Account of the Chief Eras and Systems Used by Various Nations...' |publisher=George Bell & Sons |year=1875 |location=London |author-link=John James Bond |access-date=13 March 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201121133435/https://books.google.com/books?id=b2wBAAAAQAAJ |archive-date=21 November 2020 |url-status=live}}
*{{Cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.69034/page/n5/mode/1up |title=The Statutes at Large: from the 23<sup>d</sup> to the 26<sup>th</sup> Year of King George II |publisher=Charles Bathurst |year=1765 |editor-last=Pickering |editor-first=Danby |editor-link=Danby Pickering |volume=20 |location=Cambridge |access-date=28 January 2020 |url-status=live}} (This is the original 1750/51 Act, in facsimile image. For clearer text, with [[long s]] ({{char|ſ}}) converted to modern {{char|s}}, see [[:s:British Calendar Act of 1751|British Calendar Act of 1751]], the original text of the 1750 Act in plain text (ASCII), from [[Wikisource]].)
*{{Cite book |title=A Handbook of Dates for students of British History |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |others=Revised by Michael Jones, 2000 |year=1945 |isbn=9780521778459 |editor-last=C R Cheney |editor-link=C. R. Cheney |location=Cambridge}}
* {{Cite journal |date=1995 |title='Give us our eleven days!': calendar reform in eighteenth-century England |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/651100 |url-status=live |journal=Past & Present |publisher=[[Oxford Academic]] |volume=149 |pages=95–139 |doi=10.1093/past/149.1.95 |jstor=651100 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201029014615/https://www.jstor.org/stable/651100 |archive-date=29 October 2020 |access-date=4 December 2020 |author-last1=Poole |author-first1=Robert |author1-link=Robert Poole (historian) |number=1}}
* {{Cite book |last=Poole |first=Robert |url=http://insight.cumbria.ac.uk/id/eprint/710/ |title=Time's alteration : calendar reform in early modern England |date=1998 |publisher=[[UCL Press]], [[Routledge]] [[Taylor & Francis]] |isbn=9781857286229 |access-date=4 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123155801/http://insight.cumbria.ac.uk/id/eprint/710/ |archive-date=23 January 2021 |url-status=live}}
* {{Cite book |last=Steel |first=Duncan |title=Marking Time: The Epic Quest to Invent the Perfect Calendar |publisher=[[Wiley (publisher)|Wiley]] |year=2001 |isbn=9780471404217 |location=New York |author-link=Duncan Steel}} (also available as e-book)
* {{Cite book |last=Young |first=Chester Raymond |title=An Appalachian Symposium: Essays Written in Honor of Cratis D. Williams |date=1977 |publisher=[[Appalachian State University]] |editor-last=J. W. Williamson |pages=147–158 |chapter=The Observance of Old Christmas in Southern Appalachia |doi=10.2307/j.ctt1xp3mkm.16 |jstor=j.ctt1xp3mkm.16 |access-date=26 November 2020 |chapter-url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1xp3mkm.16 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201203213143/https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1xp3mkm.16 |archive-date=3 December 2020 |url-status=live}}
* {{Cite book |last=Chesterfield |first=Earl of |url=http://public-library.uk/ebooks/57/92.pdf |title=Letters to his son |date=1751 |author-link=Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield |access-date=27 September 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191101044900/http://public-library.uk/ebooks/57/92.pdf |archive-date=1 November 2019 |url-status=live |via=public-library.uk}}
{{refend}}

==External links==
*{{UK-LEG|path=apgb/Geo2/24/23|title=Calendar (New Style) Act 1750}} the Act as amended and in force today, from the National Archives
*{{UK-LEG|path=apgb/Geo2/25/30|title=Calendar Act 1751}} An act to amend the 1750 Act, from the National Archives 
* [[:s:British Calendar Act of 1751|Original text of the Act]] in ASCII, at [[Wikisource]]

{{UK legislation}}

[[Category:Calendars]]
[[Category:Great Britain Acts of Parliament 1750]]
[[Category:Time in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:1750 in science]]
[[Category:1750 in Christianity]]