SELBORNE HUNDRED 



SELBORNE 



de Port and held of him by Robert. 75 Although there 

 is no mention of Hyde Abbey as overlord of Hugh de 

 Port in 1275, his descendant John de St. John held 

 half a knight's fee in Norton of the abbot of Hyde, 

 who held the same in chief of the king. 76 This half 

 knight's fee was undoubtedly the manor which Hugh 

 de Port had held, for like the rest of the manors in- 

 cluded in Hugh's extensive fief in Hampshire the 

 manor of Norton remained in the hands of his heirs, 

 and passed with the failure of his heirs male in the 

 fourteenth century to the family of Poynings, by the 

 marriage of Isabel, the only surviving child of Hugh 

 de St. iohn," to Lukede Poynings. The heirs male 

 of the Poynings failed on the death of Hugh in 1426, 

 and the manor of Norton passed to the Paulet family 

 by the marriage of Constance, coheiress of Hugh de 

 Poynings, with John Paulet. The latter died in 1437, 

 but there is no inquisition on his lands in Hampshire. 78 

 Constance survived him until 1443, but evidently 

 Norton was no part of her dower, as it is not again 

 given in the inquisition taken at her death. 79 In 1460 

 John Paulet, son and heir of the former, no doubt to 

 secure his tithe enfeoffed John Hilton, Edwin Brocas, 

 and John Pole in the manor of Norton, then valued 

 at i o marks, who restored the same to John Paulet 

 and Eleanor his wife jointly and their heirs and 

 assigns. 90 John Paulet died in 1492 seised of the 

 manor, leaving Eleanor his widow and John Paulet 

 his son and heir. 81 In this inquisition the manor is 

 said to be held of the bishop of Winchester, by what 

 service the jurors do not know. The same overlord 

 is given in the inquisition taken on Eleanor's death in 

 1507," but on the death of John Paulet the younger 

 in 1525 the manor is said to be held of Hyde Abbey. 83 

 However, between this year and 1540 the abbey lost 

 all claim to the overlordship of the manor, for there 

 is no trace of it in the list of the abbey possessions 

 among the Ministers' Accounts for that year. 81 In 

 1471 William Paulet the first marquis of Winchester, 

 son and heir of the John Paulet who died in 1525, 

 sold the manor or farm of Norton to James Rythe and 

 his wife Isabel. 85 In January, I 572, James Rythe settled 

 the manor on Nicholas Tichborne and Marlion Rythe 

 to be held by the said James and Isabel for term of life, 

 and after their decease by George Rythe of Liss, who 

 had married Isabel's daughter Elizabeth, and his heirs 

 male. 86 James Rythe died in December of the same 

 year, leaving his wife Isabel in possession of the manor 

 of Norton. 87 In May, 1607, George Rythe, to whom 

 the manor had reverted on the death of Isabel, died 

 seised of the same, leaving a son and heir George. 88 

 [n the same year Marlion Rythe and Nicholas Tich- 

 borne secured their right in the manor by fine and 



recovery dealing with the same. 89 Five years later 

 George Rythe conveyed the manor by fine to Nicholas 

 Steward, 90 who died seised of the same in 1633 leav- 

 ing his grandson Nicholas his heir. 91 This Nicholas 

 Steward, or Stuart, threw in his fortunes with the 

 king during the Civil War, was fined 1,400 as a 

 Royalist in i647, 92 and was rewarded for his loyalty 

 by being created baronet in l66o. 93 He died in 1710, 

 and was succeeded in his estates by his grandson and 

 heir, Sir Simeon Stuart, who held Norton until his 

 death in \j6i. M Thus in a perambulation of the 

 parish of Sel borne made in 1741, the bounds are said 

 to 'take in Sir Simeon Stuart's land, rented by Edward 

 Harrison, including the meadow called the Hose or 

 Stocking, to pass thence on to Norton Farm, formerly 

 rented by Farmer Matthews, lately by John Daborne, 

 but now by Edward Wake, 95 as far as the gate that 

 goes out of the Barrs into the stony lane.' A visit 

 was to be paid to Norton Farm by the beaters of the 

 bounds ' according to ancient usage.' 9G Sir Simeon 

 was succeeded by his son and heir Sir Simeon Stuart, 

 who died in 1779, leaving a son and heir, Sir Simeon, 

 who died in 1816. The latter 

 was succeeded by his son and 

 heir, Sir Simeon Henry Stuart, 

 who died at Haywards Heath 

 in Sussex in 1868, leaving a son 

 and heir, Sir Simeon Henry 

 Stuart, who died in 1891 leav- 

 ing a son and heir, the present 

 baronet. 97 



The second manor of Nor- 

 ton consisting also of 2 hides 

 was held of Edward the Con- 

 fessor as one manor by Elwin. 98 

 At the time of the survey it 

 was held by Ralph de Morti- 

 mer, 99 whose descendant, Roger 

 de Mortimer, held half a knight's 

 fee in Norton of the king in chief in 1275, while 

 Walter de Raddene held the same of Roger. 100 In 

 1284 William de Brayboef died seised of half a 

 knight's fee in Norton, which James de Norton 

 held of him by the gift of Robert de Tisted, 101 

 rendering for the same 2O/. for scutage and pay- 

 ing suit to William de Brayboet's court at Cram- 

 bourne. 101 Hugh de Brayboef, son and heir of William, 

 succeeded to his father's right in Norton, and in 

 1316 James de Norton was still holding the manor 

 of him. 103 Thomas de Norton, son of James by his 

 wife Elizabeth, 104 having in 1331 proved his right to 

 the whole manor against a claim of dower made by his 

 stepmother Margaret and her second husband Edmund 



STUART or HARTLEY 

 MAUDITT. Or a Jesse 

 checkered argent and 

 axure and a scutcheon ar- 

 gent "with a lion gules 

 and a ragged bend or 

 over all. 



7' y.C.H. Hants, i, 485*. 



" 6 Rot. Hund. (Rec. Com.), ii, 224. Yet 

 in the taxation survey of 1291 the manor 

 of Norton is not entered among the pos- 

 sessions of Hyde Abbey. Pope Nich. Tax. 

 (Rec. Com.), 213. 



"' The Ports assumed the name of 

 St. John after the marriage of Adam de 

 Port with Mabel, heir of Roger de St. 

 John. 



' 8 Inq. p.m. 1 6 Hen. VI, No. 49. 



"' Ibid. 21 Hen. VI, No. 22. 



80 Exch. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), bdle. 961, 

 No. 9. 



81 Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 8, No. 74. 



88 Exch. Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), bdle. 961, 

 No. 9. 



88 Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 44, No. 94. 



84 Dugdale, Man. ii, 448-50. 



85 Feet of F. Hants, East. 14 Eliz. ; 

 Add. Chart. 16197. 



86 Add. Chart. 1 6 1 98 ; Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), 

 vol. 179. If the heirs of George Rythe 

 failed the manor was to descend to Robert 

 Rythe the brother of George, if his failed 

 to Christopher Rythe, if his failed to 

 Gilbert Tichborne, if his failed to Ambrose 

 Tichborne, if his failed to Benjamin 

 Tichborne. 



8 ' Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 179, No. 74. 



88 Ibid. vol. 298, No. 73. 



89 Feet of F. Hants, Mich. 5 Jas. I ; 

 Com. Pleas Recov. R. Mich. 5 Jas. I, 

 m. 38. 



90 Feet of F. Hants, Trin. 9 Jas. I. 



91 Inq. p.m. (Ser. 2), vol. 473, No. 1 8. 



w Cal. ofCom.for Compounding, 979-80. 

 Here his estates are said to lie waste and 

 untenanted through extremities suffered 

 under the king's power. 



98 G.E.C. Complete Baronetage. 



Ibid. 



n Mr. Round suggests that the Wake 

 family may have given their name to 

 Gilbert White's house, ' The Wakes.' 



98 From perambulation entered in the 

 Selborne Parish Register. 



9 ' G.E.C. Complete Baronetage. 



* V.C.H. Hants, i, 490*. 99 Ibid. 



100 Rot. Hund. (Rec. Com.), ii, 224. 



101 De Banco R. No. 286, m. 55. 

 1M Inq. p.m. 12 Edw. I, No. 13. 

 108 Feud. Aids, ii, 315. 



104 Cal. Pat. 1313-17, p. 466. 



