Stonham, Stanham, xi and xiii cent.
Author: William Page
‘Parishes: South Stoneham’, A History of the County of Hampshire: Volume 3 (1908)
South Stoneham, in the southern division of the county, is a very large and scattered parish stretching along the banks of the River Itchen from Southampton just above Northam Bridge to Eastleigh, a distance of about six miles. Its total area, including the tithings of Allington, Barton, Pollack, Shamblehurst, and Portswood, is 8,007 acres, with 50 acres of water and 50 of foreshore. Since 1891, however, a large part of these tithings has been incorporated with newly-formed civil parishes, and the area of South Stoneham proper in 1901 was 1,296 acres of land and 26 acres of inland water. (fn. 1)
The land is very fertile and well watered by the Itchen and its smaller streams, the former being navigable as far as Winchester.
The soil is sandy, with either a gravel or clay subsoil, and considerable crops of wheat, oats, and barley are raised. The ground slopes down gradually to the river side, and is mostly low-lying and flat, especially near the mouth of the Itchen.
There is no village bearing the name of the parish, the church and a few adjacent houses are situated near Swaythling, a pleasant village on the right bank of the river just where it receives the tributary Monk’s River. Swaythling is now practically a suburb of Southampton, and is a favourite residential quarter.
The church of St. Mary, South Stoneham, lies to the south of Swaythling village, just beyond South Stoneham House, formerly the manor house, built in the early part of the eighteenth century, now the residence of Sir Samuel Montagu, created Lord Swaythling in 1907. To the south of the grounds surrounding the house, and above the Wood Mill, is a salmon pool, probably a relic of the fishery mentioned in Domesday, and the home of the salmon for which the Itchen was once so famous.
In the north of the village is the Grange, an old house reputed to be the manor house of the manor of Mainsbridge, now the property of Lord Swaythling, and Sheppard’s Farm which was once probably Swaythling manor house.
Just outside the modern parish boundaries is Swaythling railway station on the London and South Western Railway, and opposite is the Mason’s Arms Hotel. Portswood, formerly a tithing in South Stoneham parish, was united in 1894 with part of Bitterne tithing, to form a separate civil parish in the municipal borough of Southampton. The western portion of Portswood, which includes Bitterne Park, Bevois Mount and Valley, is in the ecclesiastical district of St. Denys, the church being situated on the right bank of the river, opposite the remains of St. Denys’ Priory. The Cobden Free Bridge which crosses the Itchen at this point is a fine structure, opened in 1883, consisting of five spans. Bitterne Station, on the Netley and Fareham branch of the London and South Western Railway, is in the extreme south, almost in Bitterne parish.
The eastern part of Portswood, known as Highfield and Westwood Park, is in the ecclesiastical district of Christ Church, formed in 1844, and is mainly a residential suburb of Southampton, consisting of modern villas with several large houses. (fn. 2)
Bitterne village and tithing, formed into a separate parish out of South Stoneham in 1894, is situated on the east bank of the estuary of the Itchen, and communicates with Southampton by means of Northam Bridge, near the Roman station, Clausentum.
The High Street, part of the main road from Southampton to Botley, passes through the village from east to west. North of this road the land is high, and owing to its healthy situation the place has become a suburb of Southampton.
There are several large houses facing the West End Road, including Heathfield, belonging to Mrs. Raymond; Bitterne Lodge, the residence of Mrs. Martin; and Mersham, the property of Mr. C. Noke. Lady Macnaghten lives at Bitterne Manor House, but the estate itself has been largely cut up into building plots. Freemantle Common was awarded to the parish in 1812, but is now in St. Mary Extra.
Parts of the tithings of Shamblehurst and Allington in South Stoneham were made into the civil parish of West End in 1894. Allington Farm, the old manor-house, is in the extreme north, while in the east is Townhill House, formerly the manor-house and now the residence of Miss Cooper. The village of West End is entirely residential owing to its splendid situation on a high ridge, whence fine views of the Itchen valley may be obtained, and it contains many good houses. The main road from Romsey to Botley divides the parish into the northern and southern portions.
The parish church of St. James, an edifice of red brick and Weldon stone, erected in 1838, is situated in the south of the village at the top of Church Hill.
The elementary schools are situated on the north side of the Botley road, and were built in 1838 for 192 children. A few yards farther on are the library and reading room, and nearly opposite is the cemetery, on the south side. In the extreme east of the village is the South Stoneham Union, in Shamblehurst tithing, a large red-brick building erected in 1848, enlarged in 1887, and again, by the addition of an isolation hospital, in 1894. The principal houses in the neighbourhood are Harefield, the residence of Mrs. Edward Jones; Hatch Grange, the property of Mr. R. Warnford Fletcher; Thornhill Park, belonging to Colonel Willan, J.P.; and Townhill Park, owned by Mr. Henry Bessemer. The total area of West End is nearly 3,000 acres, and it has a population of 1,778, including the officers and inmates of the workhouse.
The most northerly portion of South Stoneham, including the tithings of Barton Peverel, Eastleigh, and part of Boyatt, was separated in 1894, and formed into the civil parish of Eastleigh.
Its growth to a town within recent years is due to the extensive works of the London and South Western Railway, in which nearly all the inhabitants are employed. All kinds of machinery are made here, besides coaches, wagons, and other railroad fittings.
The town itself consists of several long straight streets, uniformly laid out, a crescent, and a few blocks of houses. The church of the Resurrection, erected in 1868, stands in the crescent at the north end of the town, next to the elementary schools, built in 1870, and enlarged in 1882 and 1889, to accommodate 478 children—girls and infants. The boys’ school is in Chamberlayne Road and will accommodate 580 boys.
The Institute, erected by the company for the use of those employed on the railway, contains a reading room, an extensive library, a large hall, and a billiard room.
In the extreme north is the recreation ground facing Withymead Lock. On the River Itchen, a little farther down, is a mill, near Barton Farm, both of which are part of the ancient manor of Barton Peverel. There is excellent trout and salmon fishing in this reach.
Eastleigh Station, on the London and South-Western Railway, is an important junction, where several branches leave the main line. One called the Eastleigh and Salisbury line runs due west, while the Gosport and Stokes Bay line passes to Portsmouth in a south-easterly direction.
SOUTH STONEHAM, occasionally called Bishop’s Stoneham, at the time of Domesday was held by the bishop of Winchester, and its revenues were appropriated to the clothing of the monks of St. Swithun’s. It possessed two fisheries, and was then valued at £8 as against its value of £7 in the time of King Edward. (fn. 3) In 1167 the manor was still in the hands of the bishop, (fn. 4) whose overlordship is mentioned at intervals (fn. 5) until 1478, (fn. 6) after which date it has been found twice only, in 1636 and 1741. (fn. 7)
The tenants who held of the bishop appear to have taken their name from the lands, for in 1236, and later in 1249, Gregory de Stoneham or South Stoneham had possessions there. (fn. 8)
In 1315 Nicholas the son of Guy de South Stoneham held the manor, (fn. 9) and the same family was still in possession in 1348, when Thomas de Stoneham settled it upon himself and his wife Alice. (fn. 10)
Twenty years later the manor of South Stoneham was held by five heiresses, (fn. 11) who may possibly have been daughters of this Thomas. They quitclaimed in 1367 all right which they had to Adam le Chaundler and his heirs for ever. (fn. 12)
The descent during the next century is somewhat obscure. In 1436, however, the manor, then in the hands of Nicholas Fitz John, was released by him to William Nicholl (fn. 13) and others.
In 1478 it was in the possession of Thomas Payne, to whom it had been demised by John Langhorn. On the death of Thomas the manor reverted to William son of this John, (fn. 14) and remained in his family until 1553, when Stephen Langhorn, or Langher, sold it for £140 to John Capelyn. (fn. 15) He was still in possession in 1600, but in that year it was purchased by William Conway, (fn. 16) and once more changed hands in 1612, when it was bought from him by Edmund Clerke. (fn. 17) His son, who succeeded to Stoneham in 1634, (fn. 18) survived him only two years, and in 1636 the estate passed to his grandson Edmund, then 8½ years of age. (fn. 19) This Edmund was apparently sheriff of the county in 1671, (fn. 20) and clerk to the Signet. He married the daughter of one Giles Frampton, (fn. 21) and dealt with South Stoneham manor in 1705. (fn. 22)
Before 1740 South Stoneham had passed into the possession of William Nicholas, (fn. 23) for in that year it was purchased from him by William Sloane, (fn. 24) who was sheriff of Hampshire in 1749. (fn. 25)
John Lane acquired the manor in 1811, (fn. 26) and he, together with Susan his wife, sold it eight years later to John Fleming. (fn. 27) Since the beginning of the nineteenth century the manorial rights have not been exercised. The manor was sold in 1878 by Mr. Thomas Fleming to Captain Daveson, and ten years later was purchased from his executors by the present owner, Lord Swaythling, who resides at South Stoneham House. (fn. 28) The old bridge called Mans Bridge gives its name to the hundred in which it lies and to two manors situated close to it.
The manor of MAINSBRIDGE (Manesbrigge, xii cent.) (fn. 29) alias TOWNHILL in the thirteenth century was held of the king in chief. (fn. 30) That portion held by the Sandfords was divided between the coheiresses of Gilbert de Sandford, who married respectively Robert de Vere, earl of Oxford, and John de Rivers. (fn. 31) The son of the former purchased that share of the manor which had passed to John de Rivers in 1317, (fn. 32) and in 1329 granted the whole of the Sandford estate to the abbot and convent of Netley for the purpose of supporting a chantry of two monks to pray there for the souls of himself, his ancestors, and descendants. (fn. 33)
In 1167 Thomas de Mainsbridge owned land in Mainsbridge, (fn. 34) and in 1217 the rent paid to the king for the same by John de Mainsbridge was granted to William Brewere. (fn. 35) John died in 1244 without issue, when his lands were divided between his sister Agnes Peverel and Juliana daughter of his sister Clementia. (fn. 36)
Mainsbridge accrued to the former and then passed down in a direct line through the Peverel family until 1365, (fn. 37) when it was purchased from Thomas Peverel, with several other Hampshire manors, by Thomas Tyrell, kt., of Essex. (fn. 38) He sold it almost immediately to Thomas Daccombe, and from him it was bought by John Smyth before 1372. (fn. 39) The estate was forfeited to the crown for alienation without licence, although in an inquisition taken in 1372 the jurors declared that it would be no damage to the king if Smyth were allowed to receive back his lands. (fn. 40) The lands, however, were retained by the crown. (fn. 41)
In 1464 the custody of all possessions ‘late of John of Mainsbridge,’ in that place, was granted for life to John Davy. (fn. 42)
No trace of the manor after this date, however, can be found, but it seems probable that it was purchased from the crown by Netley Abbey, who already held one moiety, granted to it by Robert de Vere in 1329. After this date the manor of Mainsbridge alias Townhill is known only under the latter name. (fn. 43) At the Dissolution Townhill was granted with other lands of Netley to William Paulet, kt., marquis of Winchester. (fn. 44)
His son John, who succeeded to the property in 1572, (fn. 45) mortgaged this manor in the same year, but died four years later. His son William then became third marquis of Winchester and earl of Wiltshire.
During his lifetime this manor was granted, with several other Paulet lands, to ‘the fishing grantee’ William Tipper. (fn. 46) He failed to make good his claim however, for in 1605 the marquis sold the manor of Townhill to Gideon Amondsham and others. (fn. 47)
In 1750 it was purchased by John White, (fn. 52) and by him conveyed to Nathaniel Middleton, sheriff of Hampshire in 1800. Middleton sold Townhill in 1799 to William Cator alias Gater, (fn. 53) and it remained in his family until sold by Mr. Caleb William Gater of Salisbury to Lord Swaythling, who now holds it. (fn. 54)
Another manor bearing the name MAINSBRIDGE alias SWAYTHLING was held by the De Lisles of Hyde Abbey (fn. 55) by doing suit at the abbot’s court of Stoneham. The earliest mention which can be found of the ownership of the manor by the De Lisles occurs in 1304 in an inquisition taken on the death of John son of William de Lisle. (fn. 56) The De Lisle family held it in a direct line from father to son (fn. 57) until the death of John de Lisle in 1471. (fn. 58) By his will dated 1468 he left his manor of Throckleston and Mainsbridge to his son Nicholas. (fn. 59) Nicholas by his will dated 1496 directed that after his death the issues from Swaythling, probably identical with Mainsbridge, were to be set aside for three years for the payment of legacies made in his will. (fn. 60) It appears to have then passed to the Philpotts, Elizabeth sister of Nicholas having married John Philpott. (fn. 61) Thomas his son, who was seised in 1556, (fn. 62) died in 1587, (fn. 63) and the estates of the De Lisles which had descended to him passed to his son George, afterwards created a knight, (fn. 64) who died in 1624. His son John, who inherited the estates, was also knighted, and became a staunch royalist. (fn. 65) His son Sir George Philpott took an important part in the Civil Wars of the reign of Charles I and was a noted recusant. He died leaving no male issue, and his two daughters had previously become nuns at Pontoise. (fn. 66)
In 1691 a fourth part of the manor of Swaythling was in the hands of Charles Holt and Anne his wife, (fn. 67) evidently one of four co-heiresses, and was sold in that year for £4,680 to Humphrey Wyrley and Charles Jennens. (fn. 68)
The remaining three-fourths of the manor (fn. 69) was conveyed by the co-heiresses, Ann Clobery widow, Ann wife of Sir Charles Holt, bart., Susan wife of Sir Thomas Trollope, and Maria Noel widow, to Edmund Dummer in 1712, but was held by Dummer Andrews for life until 1773. (fn. 70) Edmund’s daughter, who had married Dennis Bond, son of her stepfather, inherited on the death of Dummer Andrews, and in 1821 this manor with Pollack was sold to John Fleming. (fn. 71)
All manorial rights have been lost, and in the schedule of the Fleming estates, of 1843, (fn. 72) Swaythling is referred to as a farm, and Sheppard’s Farm is reputed to be the site of the manor-house.
POLLACK (fn. 73) formed part of the Hampton Park Estate, which was recently purchased from the Flemings by Mr. H. K. Grierson. His title deeds however shew no trace of manorial rights.
The manor of BITTERNE was granted to the bishop of Winchester by Edward I in 1284, (fn. 74) and later in the same year permission was given for the men in the bishop’s manor of Bitterne to answer at his hundred court at Waltham, instead of at that of Sweynston, as had formerly been their custom. (fn. 75)
From this time until the middle of the sixteenth century Bitterne remained a possession of the See of Winchester.
In 1552 Bitterne with other manors was surrendered by the bishop, John Poynet, in exchange for other property, chiefly churches and their advowsons, in Hampshire. (fn. 76) Three months later these lands were granted to William earl of Wiltshire, Lord High Treasurer, (fn. 77) but they were restored by Queen Mary to the See of Winchester, (fn. 78) and Bitterne was held by the successive bishops until 1869, when, on the resignation of Bishop Sumner, it was vested in the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, who at the present time are lords of the manor. (fn. 79)
At the beginning of the nineteenth century Nathaniel Middleton of Townhill, sheriff of Hampshire, purchased a part of Bitterne manor, which he called Midanbury; it now belongs to his descendant Mr. H. B. Middleton of Dorchester. (fn. 80)
In 1330 certain lands in Swaythling, worth £20 a year, were held by Ingelram Berenger. (fn. 81) The extent of these lands appears to have been 10 acres of great oakwood, and £1 9s. 6d. rent, held of the king in chief, the rent being paid to the sheriff of the county. (fn. 82)
John son of Ingelram succeeded his father in 1337, and died seven years later leaving two sons and a daughter Christina as co-heirs, and his wife Emma, who afterwards married Edmund Hakeluyt. (fn. 83)
Nicholas, the sole survivor of John’s children, (fn. 84) inherited the estate, which on his death in 1405 was divided between his two daughters, Joan wife of Peter Stantor, and Anastasia wife of Stephen Bodenham. (fn. 85) The latter survived her sister and became her heir. (fn. 86) By her second marriage to Thomas Semeley she left no children, and the lands at Swaythling, at this date called the manor, descended to Robert Bodenham, the son by her first marriage. (fn. 87)
During his lifetime he settled Swaythling and Shipton Berenger manors upon his sister Anastasia for life, but she predeceased him, and at his own death in 1467 they passed to Richard Bodenham his grandson, aged nine months. (fn. 88) Before 1480, however, the manor had become the possession of John Hall, who died in that year, leaving Swaythling to his son William. (fn. 89) Proceedings were taken against the latter in 1501, by John Pace, presumably on behalf of the Dudleys, to obtain possession of the manor, and Hall failed to maintain his right. (fn. 90)
Swaythling then became the property of Edmund Dudley, the notorious minister of Henry VII, (fn. 91) and was sold by his son John in 1538, to John Mill, (fn. 92) in whose family it descended in a direct line to Richard Mill, (fn. 93) who in 1609 settled it among other manors upon his wife Lady Mary Mill for life, reverting at her death to Thomas Savage, son of her brother John. (fn. 94) Thomas Savage entered into possession in 1623, (fn. 95) having been created a baronet. He also inherited Nursling (q.v.), the history of which Swaythling shares from this date. (fn. 96)
ALLINGTON (Ellatune xi cent.; Aldington xiii cent.) at the time of the Domesday Survey was held by William Alis, it was then assessed at two hides, had a church and two mills worth 20s. (fn. 97) It was later held of the honour of Wallingford, parcel of the Duchy of Cornwall. (fn. 98)
A grant of the tithes of land in Allington with pannage to the newly founded priory of St. Denys, by William Alis, was confirmed by Bishop Godfrey de Lucy in 1204, (fn. 99) and a little later a further grant of rents from Allington manor was made by Thomas Alis, with the consent of Roger his father. (fn. 100) Roger was still seised in 1223, (fn. 101) but before 1304 the male line of the family apparently ceased with the death of William Alis, who left his estate to his two daughters, Isabella and Margaret, wives of Robert le Helyon and William le Rolleston, Juliana his widow, who survived him, (fn. 102) having a life interest. The moiety inherited by Margaret passed in 1306 to Richard Woodlock, (fn. 103) who died in 1318 and was succeeded by his son William and Margaret his wife. (fn. 104) The former apparently predeceased his wife, who was in possession of this portion in 1347, (fn. 105) which on her death passed to John Woodlock and Agnes his wife, who were seised in 1379. (fn. 106)
It is evident that John Woodlock died without male issue, for before 1408 this portion of Allington had passed into the possession of his daughter Joan, wife of William Oysell, (fn. 107) and later the wife of William Park. (fn. 108) She transferred this property in this year to John Frcmond, steward of Winchester College, who died in 1420, and by his will left all his property in Allington, subject to his wife’s life interest, (fn. 109) to the college to assist in clothing the choristers. In 1306 Robert le Helyon, who had married Isabel, co-heiress of Margaret Alis, purchased a certain messuage and land from Valentine de Chaldecote and Ellen his wife. (fn. 110) This, together with his wife’s moiety of Allington manor, descended in 1326 to Thomas his son, (fn. 111) who apparently died shortly afterwards, for in 1330 Walter held Robert le Helyon’s lands here. (fn. 112)
The descent of this moiety for the rest of the fourteenth century is obscure, but it seems probable that it passed in the female line to Amice wife of John More, who was holding it with her husband in 1408, when they granted a portion to John Fromond, (fn. 113) who left it with the other part of Allington manor to Winchester College (q.v.). From Henry their son and his wife Christine the remaining moiety of John More’s lands in Allington passed to Nicholas, (fn. 114) who died in 1496, when it was divided between his two daughters Joan and Christine, then infants. (fn. 115) The former survived her sister, who married John Dawtrey and died without issue. (fn. 116) Joan therefore inherited the whole estate. She married first William Ludlow, by whom she had a son George, and secondly Robert Temmes. She survived him also and at her death in 1563 her son George Ludlow became her heir. (fn. 117) His son Sir Edmund succeeded him in 1580, (fn. 118) and obtained a grant from the king of free warren in his lands here and elsewhere in 1618. (fn. 119) Four years later, however, Allington manor was purchased by John Major of Southampton for £900. (fn. 120) Major died in 1630, and was succeeded by his son Richard. (fn. 121) He left Allington to his nephew Major Dunch, who had also inherited Baddesley and Townhill manors before 1672. (fn. 122)
From this date Allington manor follows the same descent as the manor of Townhill (q.v.).
The manor of BARTON in South Stoneham is called BARTON PEVEREL, from the family of Peverel, which appears to have held it from a very early date.
Andrew Peverel inherited lands there in 1227 on the death of his father Robert. (fn. 123) On Andrew’s death it passed to his son Thomas, who died in 1306, (fn. 124) being followed by his son Andrew, (fn. 125) who died in 1328, (fn. 126) and his grandson, another Andrew, successively.
The latter died without issue in 1376, (fn. 127) when Barton Peverel was divided between his two great nephews, Edward Fitz Herbert and John Brocas, grandsons respectively of his sisters Lucy and Alice. (fn. 128)
On the death of John Brocas without issue in 1377–8 Edward acquired the whole manor, (fn. 129) which in 1387, subject to the life interest of his widow Joan, passed to his sister Alice, wife of Thomas West. (fn. 130) Her son Thomas, (fn. 131) and his two sons, Thomas (fn. 132) and Reginald, afterwards Lord De La Warr, (fn. 133) held it successively.
From Reginald it passed to Richard, (fn. 134) and thence to Thomas West, (fn. 135) who in 1539 sold Barton Peverel manor to Peter Philpott, (fn. 136) in whose family it descended, like Swaythling (q.v.), until 1636, when Henry Philpott, a noted recusant, sold it to Edward Bosden. (fn. 137)
Shortly afterwards it was acquired by Benjamin Wybarne on a lease for thirteen years, but owing to his recusancy it was sequestered in 1645. Edward Bosden appealed to the crown on the expiration of the term and obtained the discharge of the estate. (fn. 138) He apparently disposed of all claim in Barton Peverel manor to his lessee, Wybarne, whose son John held the manor and its water-mill in 1719. (fn. 139)
In 1759 Katherine Wybarne held the manor, (fn. 140) but in 1764 the property was purchased by Thomas Lee Dummer, (fn. 141) and from this date has followed the descent of the manors of Netley and Hound, (fn. 142) Mr. Tankerville Chamberlayne being the present lord of the manor.
The manor of EASTLEIGH, in South Stoneham, is given in the Domesday Survey as the property of Henry the Treasurer, and a former possession of Earl Godwin. (fn. 143)
The overlordship of the manor during the next two centuries is difficult to trace. In 1260 Herbert son of Peter answered for the Eastleigh fee, but in 1306 it was held by the Beauchamps of the king in chief by the service of being chamberlain of the king’s exchequer. (fn. 144) The Beauchamp estates passed by marriage to Richard Nevill, earl of Warwick, the king-maker. His wife was a Beauchamp, and survived both her husband and her two daughters.
At the beginning of the reign of Henry VII she granted the whole of the Warwick estates to the king and his heirs male. (fn. 145) From this date the manor of Eastleigh has been held directly of the crown. (fn. 146)
In 1167 Ralph de Eastleigh held lands here, (fn. 147) being followed by his son Hugh, who in 1219 increased the estate by the purchase of other lands from Richard son of Guy, and John de Venoiz, from whom he was to hold the same by the service of a third part of a knight’s fee. (fn. 148)
At the latter end of this century Eastleigh had passed into the possession of William de Roos and Eustacia his wife. (fn. 149) In 1271 they conveyed it to William de Wyntershull and Beatrice his wife, to hold of William de Roos and his heirs by a rent of a pair of gold spurs. (fn. 150) Eastleigh became the property of John de Wyntershull, son of William, in 1287, (fn. 151) and at his death passed to his brother Walter, who was holding in 1295 (fn. 152) and 1316. (fn. 153)
William, who died in 1362, demised it to Thomas his brother, (fn. 154) who died in 1388, (fn. 155) and was succeeded by his son, another Thomas, on whose death in 1417 the manor passed to Thomas de Wyntershull his son. (fn. 156) He died without issue in 1420, when the manor was divided between his sisters, Joan wife of William Catton, and Agnes wife of William Basset. (fn. 157) Agnes sold her share in the estate to the children of her sister, (fn. 158) and Eastleigh then became the property of William Weston, son of Joan by her first marriage, and subsequently, on his death without issue, of his sister Margaret, wife of Thomas Welles. (fn. 159) She, on her death in 1513, (fn. 160) left her son John Welles as heir, and from him Eastleigh passed to his son Thomas, (fn. 161) and in 1553 to his grandson Gilbert Welles. (fn. 162) Gilbert (fn. 163) died in 1598, (fn. 164) and was succeeded by his son Thomas, and afterwards in 1631, by his grandson Gilbert, (fn. 165) whose lands were confiscated for recusancy during the life of his sons Charles and Swithun, the family of Welles being notoriously recusant and royalist. (fn. 166) Their lands were, however, subsequently restored, and Eastleigh came into the possession of Thomas Welles and his son Henry successively. In 1734 Henry, Charles, and Alexander Welles sold Eastleigh manor with two water-mills, court leet and court baron, free warren and fishery, to James Ryder, (fn. 167) and before the end of the eighteenth century the whole estate had passed into the possession of Walter Smythe, who purchased the manor with the attached farm and mills from Peter Rorke and John Prujean in 1779. (fn. 168) Two years later he mortgaged Eastleigh to Thomas Bennett for £2,000. (fn. 169)
From this date no further trace of Eastleigh is to be found, and it is probable that it was incorporated with the adjoining manor of Barton Peverel; (fn. 170) for Mr. Tankerville Chamberlayne, lord of that manor, holds Eastleigh farm and Great Eastleigh House with it, although no rights are attached to either. Any rights that formerly existed must have fallen into abeyance in the early part of the nineteenth century.
In 1124 Henry I founded in PORTSWOOD the priory of St. Denys, and in the foundation charter granted to it a parcel of land between Portswood and the River Itchen which formerly paid 11s. 6d. yearly to the king. (fn. 171) In 1189 the priory received a further grant from Richard I, of Kingsland, and a wood called Portswood which gives the name to the surrounding district, (fn. 172) and in 1305 Elias Starie granted to the monks 25s. rent from land in Portswood. (fn. 173) These lands and rents were held by the prior until the Reformation, (fn. 174) when the value of the ‘manor’ of St. Denys with its grange is given as £13 6s. 8d. (fn. 175) In 1538 the site of the priory and the adjoining grange, with about 374 acres of land and 90 acres of wood, were granted by the king to Francis Dawtrey. (fn. 176) A manor of Portswood mentioned in a list of his property made at his death in 1569 is probably identical with this priory manor. (fn. 177) This had been previously settled on his wife Elizabeth for her life, with reversion on her death to Richard Knight. (fn. 178) John Knight, son of Richard, was seised in 1615, and Portswood was apparently in the same hands in 1658, when a map of the manor gives John Knight as the owner. This map shows the demesne lands to comprise the priory site and buildings, a conduit, paddock and orchard, and to the south-east of the church a weir for the taking of fish from the Itchen, which supplied the ancient convent. (fn. 179) The Morgans were in possession of Portswood manor in 1689 (fn. 180) and 1693, and it descended under the will of Richard Morgan to Thomas Wood, who was seised in 1776. (fn. 181) From Thomas Wood, junr., who held the manor in 1812, (fn. 182) it has passed by many conveyances to Mr. T. A. Skelton. (fn. 183) He sold the site of the priory to Mr. W. H. Baigent in 1878, and it has recently been disposed of for building purposes.
At the present time it appears that there are no manorial rights here, nor can record of any be found. No courts are now held, as the Portswood men have always attended the Southampton court since the time of Richard II, being within the borough.
In the thirteenth century record is found concerning land in SHAMBLEHURST in South Stoneham. In 1219, 1 carucate of land in that place was granted by a certain John son of Peter to the prior of St. Denys, near Southampton, who was to hold the same by payment of a rent of 1 lb. of cummin. (fn. 184) At this same period half a carucate of land was held by Svelfus son of Walter, who in 1219 conveyed it to Matthew de Wellop. (fn. 185)
Thirteen years later a certain Matthew Turpin and Anne his wife held the same amount of land here. (fn. 186)
John Biset held the manor at his death in 1241, and on the division of his estates among his three co-heiresses Margaret his daughter, wife of Richard de Rivers, obtained possession of this manor, (fn. 187) which was held of Robert de Vere, earl of Oxford, who purchased from John de Rivers in 1317 all his rights in Townhill and Shamblehurst. (fn. 188)
No mention of Shamblehurst is to be found among the lands of the De Veres after 1317, and since at the Dissolution Shamblehurst farm with Townhill manor was in the possession of Netley Abbey, it seems probable that the grant of Robert de Vere of Townhill to Netley Abbey in 1329 included Shamblehurst. (fn. 189)
The lands of Netley Abbey in Shamblehurst were granted by Henry VIII, in 1537, to Sir William Paulet, kt., (fn. 190) and two years later, by a similar grant, he received that part of Shamblehurst which had formerly belonged to St. Denys’ Priory, and is described as the grange. (fn. 191) In the inquisition taken on the death of Sir William Paulet’s grandson in 1599–1600, Shamblehurst is no longer called a manor, but merely a farm held with Townhill. (fn. 192) Later than this no trace of manorial rights can be found, and if any such had existed it is evident that the Paulets allowed them to fall into abeyance. The history of the farm of Shamblehurst from this date is the same as that of Townhill manor (q.v.). (fn. 193) Shamblehurst was not sold with Townhill, however, to Lord Swaythling, but still remains in the possession of Mr. Caleb W. Gater of Salisbury, and is occupied by Mr. N. Baxendale. (fn. 194)
The church of OUR LADY has a chancel 24 ft. by 15 ft. 6 in. with south vestry, nave 52 ft. 4 in. by 20 ft. 4 in. with small north and larger south transepts, and a west tower.
The plan of the nave and chancel seems to belong to the end of the twelfth century, and the chancel arch and walls of the chancel and perhaps a little of the nave walls are of this date.
The east window of the chancel is of the fifteenth century, with three cinquefoiled lights and tracery over, and in the north wall are three single lights, the middle window higher in the wall than the others, and round-headed, being of the date of the wall, the lancets on either side of it being thirteenth-century additions. On the south side the same arrangement formerly existed, but the west window of the three is not now to be seen, probably because it has been blocked by the modern vestry. The small pointed doorway opening to the vestry appears to be a thirteenth-century priest’s door. In the east wall of the chancel, north of the altar table, is a rebated recess with an arched head, and in the north wall a second recess, but without a rebate.
The chancel arch of two pointed orders with a roll on the western angles, and large moulded label and abaci, has detached jamb-shafts to the outer order, and keeled engaged shafts to the inner. The latter have hollow-fluted capitals and spurred bases, while the capitals of the outer order are carved with plain foliage.
Hardly any features of ancient date remain in the nave, which has two windows on the north and one on the south, and is fitted with a west gallery. The north transept has modern two-light windows on east and west, and opens to the nave by a modern arch of twelfth-century style, but the jambs of the arch are of old stonework, perhaps of fourteenth-century date.
The south transept opens to the nave by a tall arch with a poor imitation of twelfth-century detail, and is of modern date.
The tower is apparently of the sixteenth century, with two-light belfry windows uncusped, and an embattled parapet. Over the west doorway, which is a modern imitation of twelfth-century work, is a niche, and the west doorway of the nave, on the east of the tower, is of uncertain date though probably mediaeval, with a plain chamfered arch. The roofs of the church are red tiled and the internal woodwork is nearly all modern. In the vestry is a seventeenth-century table, and on the south side of the chancel arch a good carved chest of much the same date. Over the chancel arch are the royal arms of Charles II, dated 1660, and above the belfry window on the south face of the tower is a sundial dated 1738.
The font, at the north-east of the nave, is of Purbeck marble, of late twelfth-century date, with a square bowl having four round-headed arches on each face inclosing wedge-shaped objects in relief. The upper surface of the bowl has foliage in the angles, and the bowl is carried on a central and four outer shafts, the latter being modern, while the base stone is old.
There are several interesting monuments. On the north wall of the chancel, below the middle window, is a pretty recessed tomb of c. 1540, with a panelled base in three divisions, each bearing a blank cartouche in a wreath, while on the upper part, which has a four-centred canopy with panelled soffit of Gothic detail, flanked by pilasters of Italian style carrying an arabesque cornice, are three other panels, the two outer with blank cartouches, and the middle one having a tablet engraved with the initials F.D., B.D.
On the south side of the chancel, opposite this tomb, is that of Edmond Clerke, 1632, and his wife Anne: their figures kneeling under a canopy, with those of four sons and eight daughters on the base of the monument. The north wall of the north transept is entirely occupied by the large grey and white marble monument of Edmund Dummer, 1724.
There are three bells, one by Gillett and Bland of Croydon, 1880, and the others of 1603 and 1619.
The plate consists of a silver cup of 1630, a second cup with a paten given in 1704 by Mrs. Amy Clarke, another cup and paten given in 1756 by Mrs. Elizabeth Shoare, a salver of 1828, given by Mrs. Mary Jones, and a pewter flagon, the gift of the Rev. W. D. Harrison.
The first book of registers goes from 1663 to 1713, the second to 1754, and the third, containing baptisms and burials only, to 1793. The fourth book continues these entries to 1812, while the marriages from 1754 to 1812 are entered in two other books.
SOUTH STONEHAM church at the time of the Domesday Survey was the property of Richer the clerk, who held this, with two dependent churches near Southampton, of the bishop of Winchester. (fn. 195)
In the Valor of 1535 South Stoneham rectory is described as an appropriation of St. Mary’s Church, Southampton, (fn. 196) and both churches were peculiar benefices, in the gift and under the special jurisdiction of the bishop of Winchester. (fn. 197)
During the past three centuries the living has been in the gift of the rector of St. Mary’s, Southampton, who still holds the right of presentation. (fn. 198)
Of the ecclesiastical property belonging to South Stoneham, the tithe-rent charges were transferred from St. Mary’s to the church of Portswood in 1863, (fn. 199) while later still, in 1879, a grant of some of the lands was made to the bishop of the diocese as endowment. (fn. 200)
By an order of the Charity Commissioners of 12 May, 1905, a scheme was established for the administration of the three following charities, viz.:—
James Serle’s Charity gift, about 1680, endowment £50 19s. 1d. consols, income to be divided between two poor widows of the tithing of Allington and two of the tithing of Shamblehurst.
George Alexander Fullerton, will, proved P.C.C. 1847, £360 consols, income to be distributed amongst the distressed poor of the ancient parish of South Stoneham, and Harriet Louisa Crabbe, will, proved P.C.C. 1848, £90 consols, income to be distributed at Christmas in each year among poor persons of the ancient parish of South Stoneham. The several sums of stock are held by the official trustees, and the dividends thereon, amounting together to £12 10s. a year, are applied by the administering trustees appointed by the above-mentioned order proportionately in respect of each of the charities.
In 1689 the Rev. John Dummer gave to the vicar and churchwardens an annuity of 40s. payable out of his estate called Barn’s Land, to be divided between two poor of the village of Swaythling and two of West End. The rent-charge is paid by R. Warneford Fletcher, esq. In 1905 10s. was given to each of four persons.
In or about 1863 Miss Janet Hoyes gave a sum of £109 17s. 9d. consols, the income to be applied, subject to repairs of monument, in the distribution of clothing among the poor of the parish. The stock is held by the official trustees and the dividends, amounting to £2 14s. 10d., are duly applied.
Chapelry of Bitterne.
By deed, dated 11 June, 1868, Stewart Macnaghten, as the residuary legatee of the late Miss Janet Hoyes—after reciting that in order to carry into effect the intention of that lady he had at his own expense placed a clock in the tower of the church of St. Saviour’s and that a sum of £55 had been subscribed by various donors towards winding and keeping in proper repair the said clock—transferred to the Official Trustees of Charitable Funds £100 reduced £3 per cents. (now £100 consols), the charity to be known as ‘The Janet Hoyes Memorial Clock Charity.’
The Wesleyan Chapel founded by deed, 1826—By an order of the charity Commissioners of 25 May, 1886, a scheme was established vesting property in trustees thereby appointed on trusts of ‘The Wesleyan Chapel Model Deed.’
Portswood, tithing of.
In 1879 Charles Twynam by will, proved at London, left to the vicar of South Stoneham £100 upon trust to invest and to apply the income for the benefit of the poor of the tithing of Portswood residing within one mile from the parish church. The legacy was invested in £100 5s. consols with the official trustees.
In 1883 William Ross by will, proved at Winchester, bequeathed funds to the incumbent and churchwardens of Christ Church, Portswood, upon trust to invest and divide the income at Christmas amongst poor persons of the district apparently of the age of sixty-one years or upwards. The legacy was invested in £493 16s. 5d. stock, now consols, with the official trustees.
|2||The total area is 1,120 acres, and it has a population of nearly 10,000 inhabitants.|
|3||V.C.H. Hants, i, 467a.|
|4||Pipe R. 13 Hen. II.|
|5||In 1284 the king transferred his rights in the manor of South Stoneham (probably claims to services) to the bishop of Winchester, and in the same year the men of Stoneham manor were exempted by royal charter from attendance at the hundred court of Sweynston, and were allowed instead to answer at the bishop’s court with his hundred at Waltham (Chart. R. 12 Edw. I, m. 77 and Cal. of Pat. 1281–92, p. 122). In 1316 the Feudal Aids, ii, 318, give the abbey of Hyde as owner of the vill of South Stoneham. They may have been overlords under a lease from the bishop.|
|6||Chan. Inq. p.m. 17 Edw. IV, No. 7.|
|7||Ibid. 11 Chas. I, pt. 3, No. 51; Close 14 Geo. II, pt. 7, No. 11.|
|8||Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 20 Hen. III.; ibid. Hil. 33 Hen. III. His property is described as 1 hide of land except 4 acres of land.|
|9||Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 8 Edw. II.|
|10||Ibid. Trin. 21 Edw. III.|
|11||Thomas de Sandwich and Ellen his wife, Agnes sister of Ellen, Isabel sister of Agnes, Edith sister of Isabel, and Thomas atte Parke and Ena his wife.|
|12||Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 40 Edw. III.|
|13||Close, 14 Hen. VI, m. 17.|
|14||Chan. Inq. p.m. 17 Edw. IV, No. 7.|
|15||Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 6 Edw. VI.|
|16||Ibid. Div. Cos. Trin. 42 Eliz.|
|17||Ibid. Hants, Trin. 9 Jas. I.|
|18||Chan. Inq. p.m. 9 Chas. I, pt. 2, No. 182.|
|19||Ibid. 11 Chas. I, pt. 3, No. 51.|
|20||List of Sheriffs (P.R.O.), 54.|
|21||Berry, Hants Genealogies.|
|22||Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 3 Anne.|
|23||Close, 14 Geo. II, pt. 7, No. 11; Recov. R. Hil. 14 Geo. II, rot. 156.|
|24||Feet of F. Div. Cos. Mich. 15 Geo. II.|
|25||List of Sheriffs (P.R.O.), 54.|
|26||Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 51 Geo. III.|
|27||Ibid. Mich. 59 Geo. III.|
|28||Ex inform. Lord Swaythling.|
|29||Pipe R. 13 Hen. II.|
|30||Chan. Inq. p.m. 28 Hen. III, No. 37; Cal. of Inq. p.m. Hen. III, No. 386.|
|31||G.E.C. Complete Peerage.|
|32||B.M. Add. Chart. 55, D. 28.|
|33||Pat. 2 Edw. III, pt. 1, m. 9; Chan. Inq. a.q.d. 2 Edw. III, No. 19. The manor was to be held subject to the payment of an annual rent of £26.|
|34||Pipe R. 13 Hen. II.|
|35||Cal. of Pat. 1216–25, p. 106.|
|36||Chan. Inq. p.m. 28 Hen. III, No. 17.|
|37||See Chilworth for details of descent which Mainsbridge follows.|
|38||Close, 38 Edw. III, m. 32 and 28.|
|39||Abbrev. Rot. Orig. (Rec. Com.), 318.|
|40||Chan. Inq. p.m. 45 Edw. III (2nd Nos.), 48.|
|41||Mins. Accts. fol. 983, m. 10.|
|42||Pat. 4 Edw. IV. pt. 1, m. 7.|
|43||At this period the manor included 20 acres of great oakwood and a fishery in the River Itchen, both of which still exist.|
|44||Pat. 28 Hen. VIII, pt. 3, m. 12.|
|45||B.M. Add. Chart. 16153.|
|46||Pat. 31 Eliz. pt. 5, m. 31.|
|47||Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 2 Jas. I.|
|48||Ibid. Mich. 11 Jas. I.|
|49||Chan. Inq. p.m. 21 Jas. I (Ser. 2.) pt. 13, No. 98.|
|50||Lay Subsidy R. 15 Chas. II, 176/583|
|51||Recov. R. Mich. 24 Chas. II, rot. 210; Feet of F. Div. Cos. Trin. 5 Anne.|
|52||Feet of F. Hants, East. 23 Geo. II.|
|53||Ibid. Trin. 39 Geo. III.|
|54||Information supplied by Lord Swaythling.|
|55||It seems probable that this manor under the name of Swaythling formed part of the grant to Hyde Abbey, by Alfred the thegn in 941. Birch, Cart. Sax. ii, 328.|
|56||Chan. Inq. p.m. 32 Edw. I, No. 60.|
|57||Free warren in Mainsbridge manor, among others, was granted to John de Lisle in 1306, Chart. R. 34 Edw. I, m. 99, and confirmed to his descendant John de Lisle in 1390. Cal. of Pat. 1388–92, p. 282. In 1339 Bartholomew de Lisle was exempt from the provision of defence for Hampshire, the guardianship of the Isle of Wight having already been committed to him. Cal. of Close, 1339–41, p. 117.|
|58||Chan. Inq. p.m. 11 Edw. IV, No. 59.|
|59||P.C.C. Will 3, Wattys.|
|60||Ibid. 7, Adeane.|
|61||P.C.C. Will 3, Wattys.|
|62||Recov. R. East. 2 & 3 Phil. and Mary, rot. 10 and 11; Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 18 & 19 Eliz. In 1563 Thos. Philpott had to apply for a writ against William Gibbons and Henry Palmer, who had seized his manors of Barton and Swaythling on the strength of certain ‘evidences and other writings concerning the said premises, which had casually come to their hands and possession.’ Chan. Proc. (Ser. ii), bdle. 146, No. 4.|
|63||Chan. Inq. p.m. 29 Eliz. (Ser. 2), No. 84.|
|64||Ibid. (Ser. 2), vol. 402, No. 129.|
|65||Ibid. 17 Chas. I (Ser. 2), pt. 2, No. 129.|
|66||Herald and Genealogist, iii, 412.|
|67||Feet of F. Div. Cos. East. 2 Will. and Mary|
|69||It is possible that the other ¼ part became the manor of Pollack, so called, which appears at this date and descends with Swaythling until purchased by Mr. H. K. Grierson (q.v.).|
|70||Recov. R. Mich. 11 Geo. I, rot. 45; ibid. East. 13 Geo. III, rot. 281.|
|71||Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 1 & 2 Geo. IV.|
|72||Fleming Estates Act, 1854.|
|74||Chart. R. 12 Edw. I, m. 5, No. 31.|
|75||Cal. of Pat. 1281–92, p. 122.|
|76||Pat. 5 Edw. VI, pt. 6, m. 26.|
|77||Ibid. pt. 4, m. 39.|
|78||Ibid. 4 & 5 Phil. and Mary, pt. 7, m. 19.|
|79||Information supplied by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners.|
|80||Information supplied by Mr. H. B. Middleton.|
|81||Pat. 4 Edw. III, pt. 1, m. 6. They had previously been forfeited owing to his adherence to the duke of Kent, at the beginning of Edw. III’s reign, but were restored.|
|82||Chan. Inq. p.m. 10 Edw. III, No. 29.|
|83||Ibid. 17 Edw. III (1st Nos.), 56.|
|84||Ibid. 23 Edw. III (2nd. Nos.), 140.|
|85||Ibid. 6 Ric. II, No. 17.|
|86||Ibid. 9 Ric. II, No. 57.|
|87||Ibid. 8 Hen. V, No. 110.|
|88||Ibid. 7 Edw. IV, No. 34.|
|89||Ibid. 19 Edw. IV, No. 33.|
|90||De Banco. R. Trin. 16 Hen. VII, m. 355.|
|91||Esch. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 962, No. 16.|
|92||Feet of F. Hants, Trin. 19 Hen. VIII.|
|93||Recov. R. Mich. 6 Jas. I. rot. 161; Feet of F. Div. Cos. Trin. 6 Jas. I.|
|94||Chan. Inq. p.m. 11 Jas. I, pt. 1, (Ser. 2), No. 76.|
|95||Ibid. 20 Jas. I (Ser. 2), bdle. 35, No. 92.|
|96||See Nursling. Swaythling manor was held by the king in 1631, but after that date all Savage lands were granted to Sir Francis Knollys, and the manorial rights apparently ceased or were transferred to Nursling.|
|97||V.C.H. Hants, i, 498a.|
|98||Chan. Inq. p.m. 11 Edw. II, No. 3; ibid. 2 Hen. VI, No. 23; ibid. 5 Chas I. (Ser. 2), bdle. 18, No. 26.|
|99||V.C.H. Hants, ii, 160.|
|100||Anct. D. (P.R.O.), B. 28.|
|101||Close, 7 Hen. III, pt. 2, m. 7.|
|102||Feet of F. Hants, 34 Edw. I.|
|104||Chan. Inq. p.m. 11 Edw. II, No. 3.|
|105||Bk. of Aids, 20 Edw. III.|
|106||Feet of F. Hants, 2 Ric. II. John Woodlock and Richard acknowledged the right of the church of St. Denys to certain rents in Allington in 1385.|
|107||Feet of F. Hants, 10 Hen. IV.|
|108||Chan. Inq. p.m. 2 Hen. VI, No. 23.|
|109||His widow evidently did not die till over twenty years later, for the college did not obtain licence to hold this manor with others left by John Fromond, in mortmain, until 1442.|
|110||Feet of F. Hants, 34 Edw. I, No. 279.|
|111||Chan. Inq. p.m. 19 Edw. II. No. 45.|
|112||Bk. of Aids, 1330.|
|113||Feet of F. Hants, 9 Hen. IV.|
|114||Early Chan. Proc. bdle. 219, m. 76.|
|115||Chan. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 11, No. 57.|
|116||Ibid. 5–6 Eliz. (Ser. 2), vol. 1002, No. 7.|
|117||Chan. Inq. p.m. 5–6 Eliz. (Ser. 2), vol. 1002, No. 7.|
|118||Ibid. 22 Eliz. pt. 2, No. 122.|
|119||Pat. 15 Jas. I. pt. 15, m. 14.|
|120||Close, 20 Jas. I, pt. 8. m. 21.|
|121||Chan. Inq. p.m. 5 Chas. I. pt. 18, No. 26.|
|122||Recov. R. Mich. 24 Chas. II. rot. 210.|
|123||Excerpta e Rot. Fin. (Rec. Com.), 162. These lands were held of the king in chief.|
|124||Chan. Inq. p.m. 34 Edw. I, No. 39. Thomas was seised of a moiety of the manor only. The property included a water-mill.|
|125||Feud. Aids, ii, 318.|
|126||Chan. Inq. p.m. 1 Edw. III (2nd Nos.), 20; ibid. 2 Edw. III, No. 53.|
|127||Ibid. 49 Edw. III, pt. 2 (1st Nos.), 26.|
|129||Ibid. 1 Ric. II, No. 4; ibid. 2 Ric. II, No. 93. This document refers to a water-mill and inclosed (separalis) water.|
|130||Chan. Inq. p.m. 10 Ric. II, No. 18; ibid. 16 Ric. II, pt. 1, No. 10. Joan died in 1393.|
|131||Ibid. 19 Ric. II, No. 49.|
|132||Ibid. 7 Hen. IV, No. 26.|
|133||Ibid. 4 Hen. V, No. 28.|
|134||Ibid. 29 Hen. VI, No. 21.|
|135||Ibid. 16 Edw. IV, No. 62.|
|136||Feet of F. Hants, Hil. 30 Hen. VIII.|
|137||Recov. R. Trin. 12 Chas. I, rot. 22.|
|138||Cal. of Com. for Compounding, 996–7.|
|139||Recov. R. Hil. 6 Geo. I, rot. 84.|
|140||Com. Pleas Recov. R. Hil. 3 Geo. II, m. 6.|
|141||Ibid. Hil. 4 Geo. III, m. 69.|
|143||V.C.H. Hants, i, 500a.|
|144||Chan. Inq. p.m. 34 Edw. I, No. 13; ibid. 11 Ric. II, No. 54.|
|145||G.E.C. Complete Peerage.|
|146||Chan. Inq. p.m. 41 Eliz. pt. 2 (Ser. 2), No. 36; ibid. 6 Chas. I, pt. 2 (Ser. 2), No. 121.|
|147||Pipe R. 13 Hen. II. In 1200 licence was given to a certain William Brewer for the building of a castle either at Stoke or Eastleigh in Hampshire (Rot. Chart. 2 John, m. 28; Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. xi, 3), but the fact that there is no subsequent allusion to a castle proves that his choice did not fall upon the latter place.|
|148||Feet of F. Hants, 3 Hen. III; ibid. Mich. 4 Hen. III.|
|149||Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 56 Hen. III.|
|150||Ibid.; Close, 15 Edw. I, m. 5.|
|151||Chan. Inq. p.m. 15 Edw. I, No. 15.|
|152||Feet of F. Hants, East. 24 Edw. I.|
|153||Feud. Aids, ii, 318.|
|154||Chan. Inq. p.m. 35 Edw. III, pt. 2, No. 82.|
|155||Ibid. 11 Ric. II, No. 54.|
|156||Ibid. 5 Hen. V, No. 52.|
|157||Feud. Aids, ii, 351.|
|158||Close, 14 Hen. VI, m. 6. The Basset family were to receive in recompense from the heirs of Thomas Welles £4 yearly rent in perpetuity.|
|159||Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 4 Edw. IV.|
|160||Chan. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 27, No. 62; She had married as her second husband—Appisley.|
|163||He appears to have leased out the manor during his lifetime to Robert and William Leyse.|
|164||Chan. Inq. p.m. 41 Eliz. pt. 2, (Ser. 2), No. 36, Feet of F. Div. Cos. Trin. 11 Jas. I.|
|165||Chan. Inq. p.m. 6 Chas. I, pt. 2, (Ser. 2), No. 121.|
|166||Cal. of Com. for Compounding, pp. 184, 3138, 3287. The value of Charles Welles’ land in Eastleigh was £45 per annum. His grandmother Isabel, and his mother Mary, who had married Sir William Courtney, both held certain lands in Eastleigh for life in dower.|
|167||Feet of F. Hants, East. 7 Geo. II.|
|168||Com. Pleas Recov. R. Trin. 19 Geo. III, m. 228; ibid. Hil. 21 Geo. III, m. 73.|
|169||Ibid. m. 156.|
|170||In 1831 Barton and ‘Eastley’ formed a tithing of the parish of South Stoneham; Pop. Ret.|
|171||V.C.H. Hants, ii, 160, Dugdale, Mon. vi, 213.|
|172||B.M. Add. MS. 15314, fol. 99b, 100; V.C.H. Hants, ii, 160b; Pipe R. 13 Hen. II.|
|173||Pat. 33 Edw. I, m. 24.|
|174||Occasional leases of land in Portswood by the prior are found; see Anct. D. (P.R.O.), B. 29, 36.|
|175||Dugdale, Mon. vi, 213.|
|176||Pat. 30 Hen. VIII, pt. 6, m. 4.|
|177||Chan. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 152, No. 140.|
|179||Hants Field Club Proc. vol. 3, pt. 2. It was one of the customary duties for the men of Portswood manor to keep this king’s weir in repair.|
|180||Recov. R. Trin. 1 Will. and Mary rot. 72.|
|181||Feet of F. Vill Southampton, Trin. 16 Geo. III.|
|182||Recov. R. East. 52 Geo. III, rot. 399.|
|183||Hants Field Club Proc. vol. iii, pt. 2.|
|184||Feet of F. Hants, 3 Hen. III, No. 16. This grant was confirmed forty years later by Walter of Shamblehurst, on condition that he received from the prior for his life a daily allowance of one white loaf and two ordinary loaves, and one gallon of beer, with a cart-load of wood yearly. Feet of F. Hants, 33 Hen. III, No. 53.|
|185||Ibid. 5 Hen. III, No. 27.|
|186||Cal. of Pat. 1231–4, p. 127.|
|187||Excerpta e Rot. Fin. (Rec. Com.), i, 358.|
|188||B.M. Add. Chart. 55, D. 28.|
|189||Chan. Inq. a.q.d. 2 Edw. III, No. 19. See Townhill.|
|190||Pat. 28 Hen. VIII, pt. 3, m. 12.|
|191||Pat. 31 Hen. VIII, pt. 5, m. 5.|
|192||Chan. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 262, No. 125.|
|194||Information from Lord Swaythling.|
|195||V.C.H. Hants, i, 467a. At this date the tithes of South Stoneham and 1 hide of land there were appurtenances of the church.|
|196||As early as 1291 in the Taxatio of Pope Nicholas a chapel attached to St. Mary’s Church is mentioned, but South Stoneham church is not included by name. Pope Nich. Tax. (Rec. Com.), 210.|
|197||Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), ii, Appendix.|
|198||Inst. Bks. P.R.O. Occasionally the right of presentation for one turn was sold by the rectors, e.g. Inst. Bks. P.R.O. 1626, 1631, 1743.|
|199||Lond. Gaz. 15 Sept. 1863.|
|200||Ibid. 7 Mar. 1879.|