1807.] 
in 1790 they were 1148, of whom above 
600 were refident. As Mr. Beltham 
{peaks from his own knowledge as to a 
late appointment to the benefice of 
Elitow, [ fuppofe he is right im ftating 
it to bea perpetual curacy, or donative ; 
but as it is deferibed as a vicarage in 
Bacon’s Liber Regis, printed from offi- 
cial documents, by the principal of the 
Office in which they are depotited ; we 
could not hefitate to defcribe it as fuch, 
unlefs we had been poffeffed of proof to 
the contrary. Mr. Belfham accufes us 
of ©ri/quing random prefiumption,” re- 
fpecting the fite of Bedford Cattle, when 
we might have obtained matter of fact. 
Now the truth is that we felt particularly 
interefted in tracing the hiftory of the 
Barony and Caftle of Bedford and took 
no fmall pains in our enquiries on that 
fubject; as muft be apparent to any one 
who fhall read the account of it in pages 
46 and 47. Im our endeavours to trace 
the defcent of a portion of the Barony, 
which we confidered as attached to the 
fite of the Cafile, we could obtain no 
information from the Duke of Bedford’s 
profetional agents, who were extremely 
liberal in afferding us every afliftance, 
that could be derived from his Grace’s 
muniments; and we flatter ourfelves that 
the hiftory ef his numerous manors 
will be found to be accurately traced to 
the prefent time, with the exception of 
its being inadvertently ftated, in the in- 
fiances pointed out by Mr. Beliham, tkat 
Goldington and Ravenfden were purcha- 
fed by John Duke of Bedford inftead of 
the Truftees under his will: the date is 
corre¢t and the whole is accurately ftated. 
in the account of Knotting,’ which was 
purchafed at: the fame time. Had our 
enquiries been directed tu the title of the 
Swan Inn, inftead of the Caitle and Ba- 
rony of Bedford, we fhould in all proba- 
bility have obtained what we were in 
fearch of; or had we known that Mr. 
Belfham was in potielfion of the defired 
information, we fhould undoubtedly have 
applied to him forit; but not having an 
opportunity of afcertaiming the tact, we 
freely own, we rifqued a conjecture ; 
and when it is confidered that we knew 
that the Gofwick family poffefled lands 
which conftitated a third part of the Ba- 
rony of Sedford ; that the Duke of Bed- 
ford then potieffed the whole, or the 
greater part of thofe lands; and that lic 
poffefied alfo the fite of Bedford Cattle ; 
the conjecture that they pafled by the 
fame title will not perhaps be generally 
deemed a very random prefumption, 
Monruty, Mac, No, 156, 
Mr. Lyfons, in Reply to Mr. Belfham. 
341 
Since our account of Bedford was printed, 
we have found a document, which proves 
that the fite the Caftle belonged to the 
family of Snagg, who poffeffed another 
third part ofthe Barony in the reign of 
King Charles [. We fhall endeavour to 
trace the poffeffors of the Cattle, from 
the Snages to Mr. Henry Horton, whom 
Mr. Belfham mentions as its owner about 
half a century ago. 
Mr. Belfhain obferves that we are not 
perfectly correét, in affirming that the 
Duke of Bedford’s etftates form what 
may be confidered as by far the largeft 
landed property in the county. ‘The 
difhculty of obtaining that information, 
which could enable us to divide the pro- 
prietors of the principal landed property 
into claffes ; and the certainty of giving 
offence by incorrect ftatements, has 
deterred us from any attempt of that 
kind; but we thought, and cannot but 
full think ourfelves perfectly fafe, in the 
calual obfervation, which was thrown 
out refpecting the Duke of Bedford’s 
eftates.. Although the number of Ma- 
nors of which a perfon is owner, cannot 
be deemed a fure criterion of the extent 
of his landed property; yet-as the pro- 
prietor of the principal manor in a parifh, 
generally has a confiderable eftate in it, 
we may conclude that the pofleffor of 
many fach manors in a county has an 
extenfive landed property there: now 
it appears that the Duke of Bedford (in- 
cluding three which he holds on leafe un- 
der the crown) poffeffes the principal ma- 
nor in no lefs than twenty-two parifhes, 
being more than a fixth of the whole 
number in the county of Bedford, ‘befides | 
13 fubordinate manors, and feveral im- 
propriate recteries. ~I cannot tell what 
the extent of Lord St. John’s or Mr. 
Whitbread’s eftates in Bedfordthire may 
be, and certainly can have no wifh nor 
motive to depreciate their value: but 
though their united poffeffions in that 
County may be as Jarve as Mr, Belfham 
{tates them to be; ftill, as the number of 
manors pofleffed by both, bears a very 
fmall proportion to thofe of the Duke of 
Bedford, I cannot but think we are 
fuficiently juftified in the expreffion we 
have made ufe of, The eftates of Lord 
St. John and Mr. Whitbread may be 
much more extentive than we were aware 
of; and this very circumitance juttifies 
our caution in not having entered into 
any further comparifon of the ref{pective 
extent of property among{t the prefent — 
land-owners of the county. g 
Had we meant to purfue the method 
xs of 
