Page:The Victoria History of the County of Surrey Volume 3.djvu/671

KINGSTON HUNDRED

KINGSTON-UPON-THAMES

was pulled down after 1830. A Mr. A. S. Douglas resided in part of it in 1842,^[1] and Commander Lambert, R.N., in 1852.

In the 12th century HAM (Hamma, xii cent.) was included in the royal demesne as a member of Kingston, and in 1168 contributed 43s. 4d. towards the aid for marrying the king's daughter Matilda.^[2] In 1174 land to the value of £19 13s. 4d. in Ham was bestowed by Henry II upon Maurice de Creon,^[3] a powerful baron of Anjou, whose English estates lay chiefly in Lincolnshire, by whom it appears to have been granted with his daughter to Guy de la Val.^[4] The latter forfeited his estates for taking arms against the king,^[5] and Ham next appears as an escheat of the Crown, part of which was granted to Godfrey de Lucy, Bishop of Winchester; and is described in the Testa de Nevill as the vill of Ham, worth £6 per annum.^[6] The bishop died in 1204,^[7] and in the next year the king granted it to Roger de Mowbray, who already enjoyed a rent of £4 there in virtue of a previous grant^[8] of the rest of the manor of Ham. Later it was granted in farm to the men of the manor who, in 1215 when the king decided to restore it to Peter son of Maurice de Creon, were ordered to render obedience to the latter as to their lord.^[9]

Peter mortgaged the manor to William Joynier who, upon the death of the former in 1221, was confirmed in his tenure by Aumary, brother of Peter, who had inherited this estate.^[10] Aumary appears to have died or forfeited before 1227, in which year this, with other of his estates in Surrey, was bestowed upon Ralph Nevill, Bishop of Chichester, to hold until the king should restore it to the heirs of Aumary, either of his free will, or by a peace.^[11]

The bishop died in February 1244,^[12] and three months later his lands in Ham and elsewhere were conceded for life to Imbert de Salinis to hold by the service of rendering yearly a bow of dogwood,^[13] but in 1248 Imbert granted a five years' lease of the manor to Peter de Genevre,^[14] which in 1252 was held by Geoffrey de Geynville who had married the widow of Peter.^[15] About this time the manor appears to have been restored to the Creon family in the person of Maurice de Creon, who married Isabel half sister of Henry III, and died before 1251,^[16] in the year after which his widow was granted the wardship of the manor.^[17] Maurice de Creon, the son and heir,^[18] described as a knight of the province of Anjou, granted the manor to Sir Robert Burnell, afterwards Chancellor to Edward I and Bishop of Bath and Wells, who was confirmed in his title to it in 1272,^[19] and, dying in 1292, was succeeded by his nephew Philip son of Hugh Burnell,^[20] then aged twenty-five. Philip married Maud daughter of Richard Earl of Arundel, and died in 1294, leaving Edward his son and heir, then aged twelve years,^[21] who in 1307 had livery of his father's lands.^[22] Edward Lord Burnell married Aliva daughter of Hugh le Despenser, and died in 1315 without issue. He was succeeded in the manor by Maud his sister,^[23] who in 1332 jointly with her husband, John de Handlo, paid 20 marks for licence to settle this estate upon themselves and their heirs.^[24] Upon the death of John de Handlo in 1346, Nicholas his second^[25] son by the said Maud, who afterwards assumed the name of Burnell, had livery of his lands in Ham,^[26] and died seised of the same in 1383, leaving Sir Hugh Burnell his son and heir, aged thirty-six.^[27]

Sir Hugh Burnell^[28] died in 1420 without male issue, and from this date the connexion of the Burnells with Ham is lost sight of;^[29] it appears to have escheated to the Crown shortly after, being included in 1466 in the dowry of Elizabeth Woodville, queen of Edward IV,^[30] together with Sheen and Petersham; and with those estates was bestowed by Henry VIII on Anne of Cleves in 1540 ;^[31] by James I on Henry Prince of Wales,^[32] and, upon the death of the latter, on Charles afterwards Charles I,^[33] who in 1639 granted it to William Murray, whose descendants, the Earls of Dysart, hold it at the present day. (See Petersham.)

A rent of 50s. in this manor was bestowed by King John on the abbey of Clermund,^[34] and an equal sum by Guy de la Val on the abbey of Savigny ; ^[35] both of these subsequently passed to the Abbot of Waverley,^[36] who claimed in 1279 to hold them by a charter from Guy de la Val. ^[37]

Some idea of the early extent of the manor may be gathered from inquisitions taken at various times : in 1253 it comprised a capital messuage worth 20s. per annum ; 200 acres of arable land worth 4d. per acre ; 7½ acres of meadow at 3s. per acre ; common pasture for 200 sheep, but if the lord of the manor had no sheep he could take nothing from it ; a weir in the Thames worth 26s. 8d. per annum ; rents of assize £1 10s. 4½d. ; labour of customary tenants £1 10s. 4d. ; the total yearly value amounting

1. Brayley, Surr. iii, 57.
2. Pipe R. 14 Hen. II (Pipe R. Soc.), 210; Madox, Hist. of the Exch. i, 589.
3. Pipe R. 20 Hen. II (Pipe R. Soc.), 3.
4. Dugdale, Baronage, i, 625; Assize R. 876.
5. Harl. MS. 5804.
6. Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 227.
7. Dict. Nat. Biog.
8. Rot. Lit. Claus. (Rec. Com.), i, 37, 40; Testa de Nevill, 226.
9. Rot. Lit. Pat. (Rec. Com.), i, 142; Rot. Lit. Claus. (Rec. Com.), i, 222b.
10. Rot. Lit. Claus. (Rec. Com.), i, 479, 482; Excerpta e Rot. Fin. (Rec. Com.), i, 64, 88.
11. Cal. Chart. R. 1226–57, pp. 54, 86; Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 227.
12. Dict. Nat. Biog. ; Chan. Inq. p.m. 28 Hen. III, no. 20.
13. Cal. Chart. R. 1226–57, p. 277.
14. Cal. Pat. 1247–58, p. 15. A lease made the year before to the Abbot and convent of Waverley (Cal. Pat. 1232–4, p. 519) was apparently revoked.
15. Cal. Pat. 1247–58, p. 218.
16. Ibid. p. 167.
17. Ibid. pp. 218, 314.
18. See Cal. Chart. R. 1257–1300, p. 181, where he is called the king's nephew.
19. Cal. Chart. R. 1257–1300, p. 180.
20. Chan. Inq. p.m. 21 Edw. II, no. 50. According to this inquisition the bishop had enfeoffed Otto de Grandison of the manor, who after holding it for two years had granted it back to Burnell on setting out for the Holy Land. See also Assize R. 902, m. 5.
21. Dugdale, Baronage, i, 60.
22. Cal. Close, 1307–13, p. 11.
23. Cal. Pat. 1330–4, p. 75.
24. Abbrev. Rot. Orig. (Rec. Com.), i, 60; Cal. Pat. 1330–4, p. 75; Feet of F. Div. Co. 5 Edw. III, no. 110.
25. For settlement on Nicholas see Cal. Pat. 1330–40, p. 302 and Feet of F. Div. Co. 14 Edw. III, no. 92.
26. Cal. Close, 1346–9, p. 113; Chan. Inq. p.m. 20 Edw. III (1st nos.), no. 51.
27. Chan. Inq. p.m. 6 Ric. II, no. 20.
28. See Chan. Inq. p.m. 9 Ric. II, no. 70.
29. It possibly passed to William, Lord Lovel, descended from Maud Burnell by her first husband. His son John Lord Lovel was a Lancastrian, and died in 1464, which would accord with the date of the grant to Elizabeth Woodville if his estate was confiscated after 1461.
30. Cal. Pat. 1461–7, p. 525.
31. L. and P. Hen. VIII, xvi, p. 717.
32. Pat. 8 Jas. I, pt. xli, no. 2.
33. Ibid. 14 Jas. I, pt. x.
34. Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 226.
35. Dugdale, Mon. vi. 1102.
36. Esch. Inq. 37 Hen. III, no. 54.
37. Assize R. 876.