LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
Most land in Kingsbury
was held from Edgware manor, and its holders owed
suit at the court held at the George inn, Edgware. (fn. 8)
Courts, view of frankpledge, assizes of bread and
ale, infangthief, and outfangthief were part of the
appurtenances of Kingsbury manor by 1325. (fn. 9) There
are court rolls from 1339 to 1486, with gaps. (fn. 10)
Freeholders and copyholders owed suit at
Kingsbury manor court twice a year. (fn. 11) A view of
frankpledge and court leet were usually held at the
beginning of May, often followed by a second
court in November. More rarely other courts were
held, as in 1349-50, when, presumably because of
the Black Death, courts in December and March
dealt with the exceptional number of presentments
of deaths and the subsequent transfers of land. (fn. 12)
After Kingsbury and Edgware manors were united
in the possession of All Souls College, confusion
between the two grew until separate courts for
Kingsbury lapsed altogether. After the last recorded view of frankpledge in 1470, (fn. 13) annual
courts were held in May until 1486. (fn. 14) Homagers
were not recorded in the early court rolls but there
was normally a jury of 13 in the 1420s, (fn. 15) although
the number had dwindled to 3 by 1486. (fn. 16) There
were probably about 20 suitors in the 15th century
but they had been reduced by amalgamation and
escheat to 15 in 1521. (fn. 17)
Richard, the reeve of Kingsbury mentioned c.
1274, (fn. 18) may have belonged to Edgware manor. The
homage elected the reeve of Kingsbury manor at the
May view and in 1350 the lord chose him from two
people elected by the homage. (fn. 19) There was a reeve of
the meadow in the 1420s and 1430s and a beadle
from the 1460s. (fn. 20) Headboroughs and aletasters,
first mentioned in 1339, (fn. 21) were usually elected at the
view. There were four headboroughs in 1428. (fn. 22)
Throughout the period 1339-1486 Kingsbury
manor court was mainly concerned with land
transactions, and with trespass, strays, and obstruction, for which last offence the lord himself was
fined in 1428 and 1434. (fn. 23) Breaking the assize of ale
was common in the 14th century but only one
instance, in 1468, was recorded during the 15th
century. (fn. 24) There are only two recorded cases of the
hue having been raised, in 1350 and 1379, (fn. 25) and two
involving fighting, in 1350 and 1435. (fn. 26) Failure to
perform customary works was a feature of the 14th
century (fn. 27) and in 1393 tenants of Edgware manor,
including John Chalkhill, were refusing suit of
court. (fn. 28)
There are two extant court rolls of Freren manor,
for 1510-12, (fn. 29) dealing almost entirely with encroachments and the destruction of wood, although the
second roll refers to a view of frankpledge. There
was a jury of four at one court and of five at the
other. A court was apparently still held by the lords
of Freren in 1622 but it lapsed soon afterwards. (fn. 30)
There may have been a court on Geoffrey le Scrope's
estate in 1325 (fn. 31) but there is no evidence of a court
on Coffers manor.
Officials continued to be elected at the court of
Edgware manor until 1914. (fn. 32) Two constables were
elected for Kingsbury in 1543 (fn. 33) but thereafter there
was only one. The election of a headborough is not
recorded from 1780 to 1831. (fn. 34) Women were
elected as a beadle in 1466, (fn. 35) as a reeve in 1543, (fn. 36) and
as a constable in 1726. (fn. 37)
In the absence of records very little is known of
early parish government. (fn. 38) The vestry minutes date
from 1802, (fn. 39) and there is a book of examinations
of paupers for settlement certificates from 1822
until 1826. (fn. 40) Accounts were drawn up by the
churchwardens and surveyors of the highway but
the parish chest was kept in private houses and
many records have been lost. The vestry met
monthly in the church or at one of the inns, usually
the Plough and sometimes the Upper King's Arms.
Meetings were attended by between four and
eleven people, presided over by the curate until
1820 when a chairman was elected. A salaried vestry
clerk was appointed in 1802.
There were normally two churchwardens from
the late 15th century, (fn. 41) although in 1802 there was
only one. From 1802, and possibly from 1776, (fn. 42)
there were two overseers of the poor, usually
farmers who held office for several years; there was a
surveyor of the highways by 1803. The parish
constable and headborough were nominated by the
vestry and presumably formally elected at the manor
court. As a result of a lawsuit over the constable's
expenses in 1804, it was decided that no money
except poor-relief was to be paid by parish officers
without the approval of five parishioners in vestry.
The parish clerk, who received expenses in 1805,
enjoyed a salary in 1808 after he had sued the
churchwarden for not paying him. A salaried
doctor for the poor was appointed in 1805, midwifery and venereal cases being excluded from his
duties. In 1832, after the sexton had been dismissed
for being drunk on duty, the posts of sexton and
parish clerk were combined in one salaried official.
The parish was revalued for rating in 1802 and
1825. The church-rate, which varied between
1½d. and 6d. in the £, was levied for specific
purposes, like repairs to the church. The poor-rate,
always 6d. in the £, was usually levied once a year.
Between 1776 and 1824 it raised between £12 and
£174, the proceeds rising to £212 in 1831 and £339
in 1835. Expenditure on poor-relief averaged £171 a
year from 1831 to 1834. (fn. 43) Relief in money and kind
was given for specific purposes, such as funeral
expenses, and the rents of paupers were paid until
1821, when the vestry forbade the practice. Weekly
allowances of money and clothing were also made,
usually to widows or bastards. Seven persons
received regular relief in 1833. From 1822 until 1826
between two and four people were examined for
settlement certificates each year, although in 1824
there were as many as 14. (fn. 44)
A poorhouse, inhabited by four widows in 1786, (fn. 45)
may have originated in the charity of Robert
Kitchingman. (fn. 46) The building, which was at the
Hyde, was very dilapidated by 1802 but it was not
until 1823 that it was replaced by two small
cottages. They were occupied in 1834 by two large
families and were sold in 1838 to help pay for the
new union workhouse. (fn. 47)
The able-bodied poor could be employed on the
roads or in digging gravel. In 1826 a single man was
paid 5s., and a man with a wife and child 7s. 6d.,
with 1s. for each extra child up to 10s. In winter
when there was no work the able-bodied received
relief. A workhouse was proposed in 1802 but
Kingsbury, being small, preferred to rely on
workhouses in neighbouring parishes. In 1815
Kingsbury paid for a pauper at Stanmore and later
it used the new workhouse which, although called
Redhill, was situated in Hendon.
By the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834,
Kingsbury became part of Hendon union. (fn. 48) The
parish became part of Edgware highway district
under the Highway Act of 1863. (fn. 49) Thereafter roads
as well as sanitation became the responsibility of
Hendon rural sanitary authority, (fn. 50) of whose
district Kingsbury became a part under the Public
Health Act of 1872. (fn. 51)
From 1881 the population decreased, leading to a
slight fall in the rateable value between 1889 (fn. 52)
and 1893. (fn. 53) Poor and backward, the parish was not
welcomed by any of its neighbours when urban
districts were formed in 1894, especially since
sewerage had already caused friction with Hendon. (fn. 54)
After Kingsbury became a ward of Wembley U.D.,
Wembley's 9 councillors resented paying for
sewerage schemes for Kingsbury, while Kingsbury's
3 councillors were frustrated through being in a
permanent minority. Personal jealousies exacerbated the situation, money was wasted in litigation,
and in 1899 the inquirer from Middlesex C.C.
considered Wembley U.D.C. 'an object lesson in
misgovernment'. (fn. 55)
In 1900 Kingsbury became a separate urban
district with 6 councillors, (fn. 56) a clerk who also acted
as surveyor, inspector of nuisances and collector of
rents, and a medical officer of health. After more
turbulence, however, another inquiry was held in
1906, (fn. 57) when the district council was described as
having furnished an example of maladministration.
The trouble was partly inherent in Kingsbury's
situation. As a sparsely populated district the
rateable value was insufficient to provide essential
services except by high rates, which discouraged
people from settling there. More important,
however, was the struggle among the councillors,
the reds and blues, for control of the chair. The two
most notorious members were Dr. Arthur Calcutta
White of Kenton Grove Farm and José Diaz, a
Spaniard who lived at Fern Dene until his death in
1915. (fn. 58) White, who had been largely responsible for
the trouble with Wembley, owned Gore farm and
caused offence with his piggeries and rubbish dumps
in Honeypot Lane. Attempted improvements by the
medical officer of health or the inspector of
nuisances were blocked by White, who in 1904
responded to a summons by dismissing the clerk.
Diaz, after his enforced resignation from the chair
as an alien in 1904, continued to instruct his
faction from the floor. Government collapsed
altogether in 1906, when minutes were rescinded, a
rate was cancelled, and bills were left unpaid.
Ratepayers petitioned for an inquiry, as a result
of which the number of councillors was increased to
nine. A works and finance committee and an outdoor committee were formed and salaried officials,
a medical officer of health, a sanitary inspector, a
clerk, and one man to serve as surveyor, assistant
clerk and rate-collector, were appointed. (fn. 59) Diaz, now
naturalized, was elected chairman, however, and in
1909 White began to interrupt meetings, which
became so stormy that the police were called. (fn. 60) Two
opponents of both Diaz and White ceased to attend
in 1910 and Diaz retained control until his death in
1915.
Diaz's death coincided with the building of
factories and the beginning of Kingsbury's longawaited development, which increased the rateable
value eightfold between 1922 and 1933. (fn. 61) By
1926 the council had committees for allotments,
highways and works,
finance, housing, and
special amalgamation. (fn. 62)
It employed a clerk, a
medical officer, a ratecollector and a joint
engineer, surveyor and
sanitary inspector. (fn. 63) The
offices were at Kingsbury
Green. (fn. 64)
Borough of Wembley.
Vert, two seaxes crossed saltirewise passing through a Saxon crown or [Granted 1938]
In 1934 Kingsbury
was amalgamated with
Wembley in a new
Wembley U.D., which
was incorporated in 1937.
It was divided into wards,
of which four, Roe Green,
Fryent, Chalkhill, and
Hyde, were formed out of
old Kingsbury parish. In
1965, under the London
Government Act, 1963,
Wembley joined with
Willesden in the London
Borough of Brent. Three
of Brent's 26 wards,
Kingsbury, Queensbury,
and Chalkhill, were
formed from Kingsbury
parish. In 1968, however, the new wards of
Kingsbury, Queensbury,
Roe Green, and Fryent
were created, which completely ignored former
parish boundaries. (fn. 65)
London Borough of Brent.
Per chevron gules and vert, a chevron wavy argent between in dexter chief an orb and in sinister chief two swords crossedsaltirewise or points upwards and in base two seaxes crossed saltirewisepassing through a Saxon crown or [Granted 1965]