61 



relative, James Butler, the first Earl of Ormond (who seems to have married 

 a TValraund) the Manors of Kilpec and Trevil, with the Baily&hip of the Forest 

 of Haywood." (Blount's MS.) 



The Bohuns, after this, got into disgrace in the Wars of the Roses^ 

 during which one or two of them lost their heads. But on the success of the 

 cause of York, and Edward 4th coming to the throne (1461), these offices and 

 manors were restored to John de Bohim, the sixth Earl of Ormond. 



After tliis date there seems to be nothing worthy of remark in regard to 

 the Forest of Haywood, beyond the fact of bailiffs or custodians, having been, 

 from time to time, appointed to it by the Crown. 



In the 20th of Elizabeth (157S), a deed in the Record Office in London, 

 states the fact of a Sir John St. Legcr being custodian of the Queen's forest of 

 Haywood, and " lord of the manors of Allensmore, Dcweswall, Grafton, and 

 Callowe in the perambulations of the same forest, until (at that date), deposed 

 therefrom by injunction from Exchequer." 



AVho this Sir John St. Leger was, I am not aware, except that at this 

 period, and for some time previous, the Herefordshire Forests under the 

 Crown (that is, since the division of England into counties) seem to have gone 

 a good deal together, especially that of Trevil, usually held by the Lord of 

 Kilpeck, and whose boundaries must be less than three miles, from the original 

 boundaries of the Forest of Haywood. 



In September 1G39 (Blount's M.SS), Kilpeck came into the hands of 

 " the Pyes of Saddlebow, the Myndc, and Bryngwyn," and there is every reason 

 to believe that the Bailywic or custodianship of the Haywood and Trevil, 

 at least, went with it, and that this continued until the reign of George 1st 

 (about 1720), when many alterations were made in the forest laws, and several 

 forests, that of Haywood amongst others, were more or less completely 

 disafforested, and their lands either granted or sold to private individuals, 

 and thence has come its descent to the present owner, F. R. Wegg Prosser, 

 Esq. 



Haywood, however, and the same with Trevil, continued, and to some 

 extent still continues, extraparochial, and enjoyed several privileges, such 

 such as being both rate and tithe-free. However good these privileges may 

 have been for the landowners, they were quite the reverse for the poor, who 

 after a time became inhabitants of the forest, and who, when in want or 

 distress, had no legal resource whatever to depend upon. The landowners, 

 for a time, took care of their own poor, but as these increased in number, and 

 two or three hard cases were brought to light, a legal power was granted about 

 seven years ago (1863), enabling the then inhabitants of the Forest of Haywood, 

 to raise a rate or rates among themselves for the relief of their poor, upon 

 precisely the same principle as in regular parishes, but the repairs of the roads 

 now traversing the forest still continues in the hands of the landowner. 



Such then is Haywood Forest in the 19th century. But I must not 

 conclude this imperfect little sketch without making some allusion to the 



