ea 
By the Rev. J. Wilkinson. 337 
it was then ordered that a decree should issue accordingly for 
plaintiff, unless good cause were shown to the contrary.” The 
result was that Edward Long was compelled, nolens volens, to 
divide the wood according to the Chief Justice’s second suggestion, 
and condemned to pay £30 towards the costs of the suit. 
We next find Edward Long, in a public capacity, as one of the 
Justices, corresponding with Lord Hertford, the Lord Lieutenant, 
respecting the salary of Nicholas Stanter, the muster-master of 
the trained bands. The Justices had in 1607 settled the salary of 
that officer, at a contribution of four pence by every “armour” 
(armed man). This was ‘“‘essayed to be effected, but much of it 
was not only neglected and not at all paid, but it is also found to 
be, by reason of such slow collection, a stop and hindrance to the 
execution and advancement of the said service.”” The Lord Lieute- 
nant therefore entreats, that some course may be adopted to make 
the muster-master “more assured of his means henceforth.” Ed- 
ward Long and his fellows accordingly at the Marlborough Sessions 
2nd October, 1611, profess themselves ‘very inclinable to satisfy 
his Lordship’s desire for the payment of £40 yearly.” But as to 
“certainty of payment thereof,” they ask for time “to treat with 
the county on that behalf,” offering their ‘“ best endeavours with 
all convenient speed.” With this ‘Promise to pay,” endorsed, 
“We wish you may get it,” poor Nicholas was, as far as appears, 
obliged to be content. Edward Long was one of those that lent 
money to the King, James I., on privy seals. He was one of six, 
each of whom gave 100 nobles, £33 6s. 8d. There were only five 
families in the county who gave more, and their contribution was 
double.! 
Edward Long had two sons, who were connected with Monkton. 
Edward who lived there, and dying without issue was succeeded 
by his brother John. This last made an addition to the manor 
house on the eastern side, and has fixed the date, 1647, in the north 
gable. At the same time also the whole house was, as appears, re- 
roofed and extensively repaired, within and without. The stair- 
cease and a chimney piece in the west bedroom may be of this date. 
Wilts Archeological Magazine vol, ii, p. 181 &e. 
