BIGGLESWADE HUNDRED 



SUTTON 



and the overlordship of Sutton followed the same 

 descent as that of Potton manor (q.v.).' The last 

 reference that has been found to the overlordship is in 

 1428, when it was held of this honour.' 



In 1086 the Countess Judith had eight tenants 

 under her whose holdings ranged from half a hide to 

 two hides/ It is impossible to say to which of these 

 holdings Sutton manor owes its origin, but it is prob- 

 able that quite early, as often happened, the various 

 portions became gradually concentrated in the hands 

 of one person. Dugdale states that Robert Foliot 

 (f. 1 168) married the daughter and heiress of Richard 



she left two granddaughters as co-heirs." Of these 

 Alice, who was married to William le Latimer, 

 received Sutton manor as part of her share in 

 Christina's estate." In 1 3 1 5 Alice le Latimer vested 

 her right to the manor in John de Kinnardseye, who 

 granted it back to her for life with remainder to 

 Nicholas le Latimer and heirs of his body, and failing 

 such to Thomas earl of Lancaster and his heirs." 

 Alice le Latimer died before 1317, in which year 

 Nicholas acquired possession Of Sutton manor, '° which 

 by 1327 had passed to William le Latimer, son of 

 Alice." His son William held Sutton at his death 



Sutton : The Packhorse Bridge 



de Reinconrt, lord of Sutton in Bedfordshire, and that 

 to him succeeded Richard Foliot his son, whose only 

 child Margery married Wyschard Ledet about 1 198,* 

 and he held the manor in 1 2 1 6.' 



In 1222 his daughter Christina Ledet married 

 Henry de Braybrooke," who had already inherited 

 from his father free tenements in Sutton." Christina, 

 who afterwards married Gerard de Furnival," sur- 

 vived her second husband many years, and at her 

 death, which occurred at some time previous to 1271, 



in 1336," when the manor passed to his son, also 

 William, who was under age at the time of his father's 

 death.'' He died in 1 3 8 1 without male heirs, leaving 

 a daughter Elizabeth, wife of John Neville of Raby,*" 

 who held this manor m right of his wife at the time 

 of his death in 1389." In 1392 Henry earl of 

 Derby, son of John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, 

 successfully claimed Sutton manor in accordance with 

 the settlement made by Alice le Latimer in 1 3 1 5 ;'' 

 and during the fifteenth century it is to be found as 



6 Testa de Ne-vill (Rec. Com.), 2+3* ; 

 Feud. Aids, i, 4, Z2, 37 j Cal. of Close, 

 1 3 13-18, p. 398; Cal. Rot. Pat. (Rcc. 

 Com.), ii, 225 jChan. Inq. p.m. lo Edw. 

 II, No. 67 ; 9 Edw. Ill, No. 51 i 4 Ric. 

 II, No. 35. * F'ud. Aids, i, 37. 



r r.CH. Beds, i, 259a. 



8 Dugdale, Baronage, i, 679. 



9 Rat. Lit. Claus. (Rec. Com.), i, 250. 

 1" Dugdale, Baronaj-e, i, 728. 



11 Ahhrev. Plac. (Rec. Com.), 87. 



" Testa de Ne-vill (Rec. Com.), 243. 



13 Chan. Inq. p.m. 55 Hen. Ill, No. 59. 



" Plac. de Quo War. (Rec. Com.), i, 77 ; 

 Feud. Aids, i, 4. 



15 Feet of F. Beds. 8 Edw. II, No. 1 1 ; 

 Cal. of Pat. 1313-17,?. 22. 



16 Cd. of Close R. 1313-18, p. 398. 



V G. E. C. Complete Peerage; Chan. Inq. 

 p.m. I Edw. Ill, No. 46. Nicholas le 

 Latimer was probably an elder son of 

 Alice le Latimer, but in spite of the terms 

 of the settlement by which the property, 

 on failure of heirs of his body, was to 

 fall to the duchy of Lancaster, Sutton re- 

 mained some time longer in the Latimer 

 family. " Ibid. 9 Edw. Ill, No. 5 1. 



1' Feud. Aids, i, 22 ; Close R. 29 

 Edw. Ill, m. I. 



20 Chan. Inq. p.m. 4 Ric. II, No. 35. 

 He is described as seised of lands and 

 tenements in Sutton held of the honour of 

 Huntingdon, and also the advowson of 

 Sutton church, but his wife at her death in 



247 



1384. held the manor, worth ^^15 jj, lo^, 

 (Chan. Inq. p.m. 7 Ric. II, No, 52). 



31 Ibid. 12 Ric. II, No. 40. 



22 CaL Rot. Fat, (Rec. Com.), ii, 225. 

 Elizabeth, in support of her claim, asked 

 for and received an exemplification of a 

 fine between John de Braybrooke and 

 William le Latimer levied in the reign of 

 Edward I ; but * as great variation was found 

 between the fine and exemplification by 

 reason of excess of substantial words in 

 the latter, and considering the latter issued 

 from the Chancery imprudently at the 

 said Elizabeth's crafty suit, the king de- 

 crees the same to be insufficient and in- 

 valid and hereby revokes it ' {CaL of Pat, 

 '39i-6»P- 33)' 



