CITY OF DURHAM 



who died in March 1664-5, was living at Old 

 Durham in 1652.'^ His son-in-law John 

 Tempest was one of the representatives of the 

 county in Parliament in 1675-8.^ He died in 

 1697 ; William Tempest his son and successor, 

 member of Parliament for the City of Durham 

 in 1678, 1680 and 1689, died in March 1699- 

 1700.^^ John, son of William Tempest, main- 

 tained the political tradition of the family and 

 was M.P. for the county in 1705.^* He married 

 Jane daughter of Richard Wharton of Durham 

 and died in January 1737-8." John Tempest, 

 his son and successor, deserted Old Durham for 

 Sherburn and subsequently Wynyard, while his 

 son John Tempest, who succeeded him in 1776, 

 made his home at Brancepeth Castle. John 

 Wharton Tempest, John Tempest's only child, 

 predeceased him in 1793 and Old Durham 

 descended on John's death in 1794 ^° ^'^ 

 nephew Sir Henry Vane Tempest.^^ He died 

 in 1813 leaving an only child Frances Anne 

 Emily. In 18 19 she married, as his second 

 wife, Charles William, third Marquess of 

 Londonderry,^^ who developed the coal at Old 

 Durham and constructed Seaham Harbour. 

 Lady Londonderry died in 1865^" and was 

 succeeded by her son George Henry Robert 

 Charles William, who became the fifth Marquess 

 on the death of his half-brother in 1872.*^ 

 He died in 1884 and was succeeded by his son 

 Charles Stewart, 6th Marquess of London- 

 derry,*^ who died in 191 5, when the manor passed 

 to his eldest son Charles Stewart Vane Tempest- 

 Stewart, 7th Marquess, who sold it to Mr. 

 William Hopps. 



Certain lands here were held of the Master 

 of Kepier Hospital by Ralph son of William 

 Claxton of Old Park, being settled on him and 

 Elizabeth his wife in 1535.*' A messuage and 

 4 acres of the same fee were in the hands of 

 Sir Thomas Danby and in 1599 descended to his 

 kinsman Christopher son of Christopher Danby, 

 of Farnley.^ Christopher Danby sold the 

 property to John Hedworth in 1609 ;** Hedworth 



33 Ibid. 68 ; Mem. of St. Gila (Surt. Soc), 136. 



3* Sharpe, List of Knights and Burgesses who have 

 represented the City and County of Dur. 14, 15. 



^ Ibid. 33, 34 ; Surtees, op. cit. 93. 



3* Sharpe, op. cit. 19 ; see settlement in 1717 (Dur. 

 Rec. cl. 12, no. 20, m. 2). 



3' Surtees, op. cit. 93. 



38 Son of John's sister Frances, who married Sir 

 Henry Vane in 1768 {Par. Reg. of St. Mary in the 

 S. Bailey, Dur. [Northbd. and Dur. Par. Reg. Soc], 41). 



3* G.E.C. Complete Peerage, v, 132-3. 



«Ibid. 133. 



*1 Ibid. 



*2Ibid. 134. 



*3 Dur. Rcc. cl. 3, ptfl. 177, no. 70. 



** Ibid. ptfl. 192, no. 95, m. 31 d. 



^ Ibid. no. 95, m. 31 d. ; Chan. Proc. (Ser. 2), 

 bdle. 319, no. 13. 



conveyed it to George Martin in 161 2 and ten 

 years later litigation ensued between Martin 

 and Danby.''* In 1622 the premises were in 

 the occupation of John Heath, but no further 

 history of them has been found.'" 



According to the tradition of Durham Priory, 

 Bishop William of St. Calais gave to the 

 Priory all the land between the Browney and 

 the Wear lying south of the brook known as the 

 Milburn. The north-eastern corner of this 

 tract was occupied by the Prior's borough of 

 Crossgate, the ' Old Borough ' of the charters.''* 

 The land lying within the loop of the Wear 

 east of the Cathedral was ELVET (Elvete 

 xi cent.). 



Elvet, with its wood, church and chapels of 

 Croxdale and Wyton Gilbert, was confirmed 

 to the Priory by Richard I in February 1 194-5 ;"" 

 at the same time confirmation was also obtained 

 of the Prior's ' new borough ' in ELVETHALL 

 (Elvetehale xi cent.) or Elvethalghe as it is 

 termed in a 1 5th cent, document.^" The mention 

 of the church in connexion with the first holding 

 makes evident its identity with what is now 

 called New Elvet, the ' newborough ' of the 

 charter being part of the Old Elvet of the 

 present day." The burghal area was not large^^ 

 and the greater part of the district lay within 

 the Prior's manorial jurisdiction and formed his 

 manors of Old and New Elvet, both together 

 forming his Barony of Elvet.^^ 



The manor or grange of Elvet called Eket- 

 Hall^ stood on the site of the present Hall- 

 garth.^^ The manor was attached to the office 

 of the Hostillar'* and until the dissolution of the 

 Priory, and by the arrangement of March 

 1554-5, it was divided between the prebends of 

 the first and second stalls." In accordance 

 with an arrangement usually followed by the 

 Chapter the manor was the subject of numerous 



"•* Chan. Proc. (Ser. 2), bdle. 319, no. 13. 



« Ibid. 



'•* See Feod. Prior. Dun. (Surt. Soc), 192 n. et seq. 



■" Cal. Chart. 1327-41, p. 323. 



^ Feod. Prior. Dun. (Surt. Soc), 194 n. 



" In 1538-9 repairs were done to tenements in 

 Old Elvet and the Borough {Dur. Acct. R. [Surt. Soc], 

 i, 163). 



S2 Lans. MS. 902, fol. 223 d. This dispute as to 

 common in 1442 shows how Uttle the boundaries 

 were understood even in the 15 th century. 



^3 Close R. 1650, pt. xxxix, no. 8. The barony was 

 regarded as a definite place and in 1540 contained 82 

 burgages and a toft (Mins. Accts. Hen. VIII, no. 

 708) ; cf. Dur. Acct. R. (Surt. Soc), i, 145, 283 ; ii, 



367. 472- 



M Rentals and Surv. (Gen. Ser.), R. 987. 



^5 This name was applied to tlie two great farms of 

 the two prebendaries in 1582 (Eich. Bills and Answers, 

 Dur. Eliz. no. 22). 



s* Dur. Acct. R. (Surt. Soc), i, passim. 



" MS. of the D. and C. of Dur. c iv, 33, fol. 148. 



167 



