ELMBRIDGE HUNDRED 



The chief entrance is from the east by a wooden 

 doorway at the north end of the hall, which has con- 

 tinuous mouldings, carved spandrels and a square 

 head ; another door is opposite this one, but has been 

 altered. From this a stair leads to the upper floor 

 of the north wing. Each wall has a double tier of 

 windows, with wood frames and mullions, but, as in 

 the rest of the house, none appear to be original. A 

 large tie-beam with a king-post spans the hall in the 

 middle, and the roof is partly ceiled. 



At the south end of the hall are the screens and 

 gallery, the latter carried by four moulded posts prob- 

 ably originally filled in with panelling. Access to this 

 was by a stair from the floor of the hall on the west 

 side, where there is an opening in the framing which 

 crosses the front of the gallery. From the gallery two 

 doors open to the upper floor of the south wing. At 

 both ends of the passage through the screens are the 

 usual external doors, but these are only reproductions 

 of old work. 



From the passage two other doors open into the 

 two ground floor rooms of the south wing, which 

 occupy the normal position of the kitchen and but- 

 tery, the large fireplace on the south wall of the 

 wing being partly blocked up, but the traces of 

 decoration in these rooms, a large moulded post in 

 the framing on each side of the east room and moulded 

 joists in the ceiling, and some leaf carving on the 

 frame of the window of the west room, seem to show 

 that they were designed for living rooms and not 

 domestic offices. It is evident, however, that the 

 building has been considerably altered at various 

 times. 



The north wing is entered by a door at the north- 

 east angle of the hall, with a moulded wood frame, 

 and contains three rooms on the ground floor, and in 

 the north wall a blocked window with hollow-cham- 

 fered wood mullions, which is possibly one of the 

 original lights. 



In 1086 Richard of Tonbridge, lord of Clare, 

 held the manor of Walton, later known as WALTON 

 LEIGH, which Erding had held of King Edward. 

 There were on the manor a church, a mill, and a 

 fishery. 37 



The overlordship continued with the Clares until 

 1314, when the last Gilbert de Clare died seised of 

 it, 38 and it then seems to have been divided among 

 his heiresses. In 1324 the manor was said to be 

 held of Hugh Audley, husband of Margaret, one of 

 the sisters of Gilbert. 39 In 1 349 Hugh le Despenser, 

 son of Eleanor, another of the heiresses, died seised 

 of one-fourth of a knight's fee in Walton, 40 and this 

 descended to Isabella Countess of Warwick, daughter 

 of Thomas le Despenser, who held it at her death in 

 1439- 4 ' Her share probably escheated to the Crown 

 after the attainder of her heir 'the Kingmaker' in 1471. 

 The descendants of Elizabeth, the third heiress, ap- 

 parently also had a share, for in 1422 the manor was 



MORTIMIK. Barry or 

 and axure a chief or 

 with two fates between 

 two gyrons azure and a 

 scutcheon argent over all. 



WALTON ON 

 THAMES 



said to be held of Edmund Earl of March, who was 

 grandson of Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March, lord 

 of Clare in right of his wife 

 Philippa, daughter of Eliza- 

 beth, granddaughter of Eliza- 

 beth the heiress, as of his castle 

 of Clare." He died without 

 issue in 1425, when his in- 

 heritance descended to his 

 sister's son Richard, afterwards 

 Duke of York, whose son be- 

 came Edward IV, when this 

 part of the overlordship came 

 to the Crown. 



Undertenants appear at the 

 beginning of the I3th cen- 

 tury, when half a knight's 

 fee in Walton was held 

 by Geoffrey de Cruce, 43 - 6 whose daughter Avelina, 

 wife of Roger Leigh or de Legh, claimed view of 

 frankpledge and assize of bread and ale within the 

 manor. 47 She died seised of it in 1299, Joan described 

 as widow of Nicholas de Cruce then being dowered 

 in one-third of the manor. 49 There were twenty- 

 six free tenants, and the manor was valued at 

 10 121. 7f</. It descended to John Leigh, son of 

 Avelina, who conveyed a moiety of this manor to 

 Walter de Langton, Bishop of Coventry and Lich- 

 field, the famous statesman, for his life ; the 

 bishop obtained from Edward I a grant of free 

 warren there. 49 He died in l322, M and the lands 

 reverted to John Leigh, who died seised of the whole 

 manor in 1325." In 1346 John Leigh is mentioned 

 as holding the manor of the honour of Clare ; 5 * but 

 his mother Margaret, who after the death of his 

 father had married Robert de Kendale, had posses- 

 sion of it for life; she died in 1348. 53 In 1410 

 John Leigh of Shell or Shellegh (Shelley), co. Essex, 

 is mentioned as holding the manor. 54 He was prob- 

 ably the John Leigh who in 1422 died seised of 

 the manor of Leigh's Court, as it was then 

 called. A court baron belonged to the manor." 

 From him it passed to his son Thomas, and so 

 descended eventually to Giles Leigh, great-grandson 

 of Thomas, who inherited it in 1509. It was then 

 held by the service of half a knight's fee in fee-tail. 56 

 In 1537 Henry VIII purchased the manor of Leigh's 

 Court from Giles Leigh, and annexed it to the 

 honour of Hampton Court. 47 The manor remained 

 vested in the Crown till late in the i8th century, and 

 was granted on lease from time to time to different 

 persons. 58 In the 1 8th century leases were generally 

 granted to the owners of the manor of Walton on 

 Thames, and thus the manor of Walton Leigh came 

 into the possession of the Palmer family. 59 Mr. 

 Palmer Hurst, who held one-third of the manor, 

 sold his share in 1 800 to the Duke of York. The 

 other two-thirds belonged to the Rev. Richard Palmer, 



X1V.C.H. Surr. i, 317*. 



88 Chan. Inq. p.m. 8 Edw. II, no. 68. 



"Ibid. 18 Edw. II, no. 71. 



'0 Ibid. 23 Edw. Ill, pt. ii (irt nos.}, 

 no. 169. 



Ibid. 1 8 Hen. VI, no. 3. The hold- 

 ing wa half a knight'i fee in the Testa lie 

 Nevill. 



Ibid, i Hen. VI, no. 7. 



48 - Tata de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 219, 



221- 



*> Plac. de QuoWarr. (Rec. Com.), 744. 



48 Nicholas may here be an error for 

 Geoffrey, otherwise there must have been 

 a Nicholas holding previous to Geoffrey. 



49 Chart. R. 28 Edw. I, m. 10. 



50 Chan. Inq. p.m. 18 Edw. II, no. 71 ; 

 Diet. Nat. Biog. 



51 Chan. Inq. p.m. 18 Edw. II, no. 71. 

 5> Close, 20 Edw. Ill, pt. ii, m. 12. 



58 Chan. Inq. p.m. 21 Edw. Ill (lit. 

 nos.), no. 19. 



47' 



" Close, II Hen. IV, m. 16. 



46 Chan. Inq. p.m. I Hen. IV, no. 7. 



" Ibid. (Ser. 2), xxiv, 47. 



7 Hist. MSS. Com. Ref. viii, App. ii, 

 236 ; Pat. 22 Jas. I, pt ii, no. 3 ; Feet 

 of F. Surr. East. 30 Hen. VIII ; Com. 

 Pleas D. Enr. Hit 29 Hen. VIII, m. 13 d. 



68 See Cal. S.P. Dam. 1623-5, p. 439 ; 

 1628-9, P- "3 i 1661-2, pp. 419, 562 i 

 1663-4, p. 41. 



" See Feet of F. Div. Co. Hil. 3 Geo. I. 



