BLECHINGLEY
Blachingelei (xi cent.); Blachingeley (xiii cent.);
Blatchinggeleghe (xiv cent.). The 't' is not often
used until the 18th century.
Blechingley is a village, formerly a borough and
market town, 3 miles east of Redhill and 3 miles
north-west of Godstone station. The parish, which
included Horne till 1705, was one of the largest in
Surrey, covering nearly 10,000 acres. The present
area is 5,424 acres, and the parish measures 4½ miles
from north to south and from 2¼ to 1¼ miles in
breadth. The northern extremity reaches the chalk
downs; the village and most of the inhabited part
of the parish are on the Green Sand; the southern
part is on the Wealden Clay, this being the normal
arrangement of a parish on the south side of the
chalk. The Redhill and Tonbridge line of the
South-Eastern railway crosses the southern part of
the parish. There is no station. The commons
of Blechingley were inclosed by award of 16 April
1814 under an Act of 1810. (fn. 1)
The prehistoric fortification on White Hill is
on the borders of Blechingley and Caterham
parishes, but when complete must have been
chiefly in the former. It is on the crest of the
chalk downs, 770 ft. above the sea. Manning
and Bray call it Cardinal's Cap, but this name
does not now seem to be known locally. Aubrey
calls the copse near it War Copse, a name (now
becoming obsolete) which is probably connected
with Warwick Wold close by. No remains of
implements, prehistoric or Roman, seem to be
recorded. The hill-track called the Pilgrims'
Way passes close by the camp, and the probable
line of the Roman road through Godstone must
also have passed near it. (fn. 2) We can only say that
there is a trace of a great hill-top camp of refuge
of a probably early date. Mr. Flower computed
the area to have been at least 20 acres, judging
from the curve of the banks which he saw. If so
it was as large as any in the county. At Gravelly
Hill near here Messrs. Wright and Johnson
found a few flint flakes, (fn. 3) and here too they
detected slight traces of banks and ditches. The
appearance of a 'stone street,' or paved road
passing near the place, is mentioned under Chaldon
parish. The Roman remains in Blechingley parish,
near Pendell Court, are noticed in another section
of this history. In a field called Chapel Plat, near
Lodge Farm in the south of the parish, there are
remains of a large moated inclosure.
The village of Blechingley is situated on a ridge,
on the road from Godstone to Redhill, about 3 miles
from the latter town. The chief part of it lies along
the main road, to the north of which stands the
church towards the east end of the village. To the
west of the church are some good half-timbered
cottages, and on the south side of the main road at
that end of the village is the 'White Hart,' a long
two-storied house with a modernized front, but
probably dating from the end of the 16th century.
In one of the front rooms is a large plain chimney
recess, with a cast-iron fire-back bearing the date
1613 and the initials M.I.F. To the west of the
'White Hart' are three brick gabled houses of two
stories, probably of the early 17th century, but much
modernized.
About half a mile to the north-west of the village
are Pendell and Pendell Court. The former house
is said to have been designed for Richard Glydd by
Inigo Jones; from the symmetry of the plan this
attribution is not improbable. On one of the
chimney stacks is the date 1636. Glydd died in
1665, and his grandson John, some time M.P. for
Blechingley, came into possession. He died without
issue in 1689, and his mother and sister Ann Glydd
sold the house to Andrew Jelf, who was succeeded
by Captain Andrew Jelf, R.N. His daughters
sold it to Joseph Seymour Biscoe in 1803, and he sold
to John G. W. Perkins in 1811. On the death of
his son John Perkins intestate in 1846 it was the
share of his sister Maria Trotter, who left it ultimately
to her sister's grandson Mr. Jarvis Kenrick, who now
lives there. (fn. 4)
Plan of Pendell, Blechingley
Pendell Court, built in 1624, as a stone tablet
over the entrance porch records, is now the seat of
Mr. W. A. Bell. It is a three-storied building of red
brick with stone mullioned windows and tiled roofs.
A modern wing has been added on the east or garden
front and a billiard-room thrown out on the north
side. Internally only a few of the original fittings have
survived. The west side of the house, however, preserves its original plan intact. The entrance is at
the centre of this front, at the north end of a large
hall, out of which open the drawing-room on the
south and the dining-room on the north; beyond the
dining-room and entered from it is a room originally
extending the full depth of the house, now used as a
study. The panelling of the rooms on the ground
floor is entirely modern, except in the hall, where
some old work exists. The entrance door, with its
moulded posts and small panels and dog-gates, and
probably the stone four-centred fireplace of the hall,
together with the plaster ceiling, are original. In the
drawing-room and the adjoining small chamber are
two 18th-century chimney-pieces of coloured marbles.
Over the hall is a large room which still retains its
original panelling and stone four-centred fireplace.
The small panelled room at the north east of this
floor has also been left much in its original state.
Externally the west front is flush, except for the central
entrance porch, which is continued the whole height
of the building, and the bay windows at the south
end lighting the drawing-room and the room above
it. In the windows of the room known as the
picture room is some modern heraldic glass; some of
the shields, including the achievement of George
Holman, the original owner of Pendell Court (who
bore Vert a cheveron between three pheons or with
the crest of an ostrich's head argent on a hat), show
the same bearings as those which till lately existed in
the lights of the hall windows. In the garden is a
picturesque 17th-century garden-house, square in plan
and of red brick, with a moulded cornice of the same
material, stone-mullioned windows and a pyramidal
tiled roof.
Adjoining Pendell Court to the south is a fine
brick house dating from the early 18th century
and known as the manor-house. About half a mile
to the north of the village, reached by the road at the
east end of the churchyard, is the old rectory-house,
portions of which appear to date from the end of the
15th century. The house is two-storied, and seems
to have undergone a complete transformation about
the middle of the 18th century. In one of the upper
rooms is a stone fireplace with a moulded four-centred
head and jambs. To the east of the rectory is the
farm-house known as Brewster, or Brewer Street Farm,
a half-timber house of two stories. Additions in the
same style were made to the old building by the late
owner, Rev. C. F. Chawner, rector of the parish.
To the east of Brewster Farm is Place Farm, all
that survives of the manor-house of Blechingley.
There was a manor-house here in 1296, (fn. 5) besides the
castle, which was then probably in ruins. A letter
written by Gilbert de Clare in 1313 mentions that
he had bought all the cattle and corn on the manor
of Merstham belonging to Christchurch, Canterbury,
to provide for his house at Blechingley, and warns the
king's officers not to take any away on any pretence. (fn. 6)
In the account of Buckingham's lands in 1521
the manor-place of Blechingley, described as being
within a mile of the town, was said to be 'properly
and newly builded with many lodgings and offices.
The hall, chapel, chambers, parlours, closets and
oratories be newly ceiled with wainscot roofs, floors
and walls to the intent they may be used at pleasure
without hangings.' (fn. 7) In the evidence collected and
brought against Buckingham at his trial it was said that,
while walking in his gallery at Blechingley with Lord
Abergavenny, he had been heard murmuring against
the king's councillors and saying that if the king
should die he meant to have the rule in England. (fn. 8)
The manors of Blechingley and Richmond, given
in 1540 to Anne of Cleves, were then stated to have
'splendid houses.' (fn. 9) The king wrote to her: 'We
have appointed you two houses, that at Richemont
where you now lie, and the other at Blechinglegh,
not far from London, that you may be near us and,
as you desire, able to repair to our Court to see us as
we shall repair to you.' (fn. 10) An old map of 1622
in the possession of Mr. Jarvis Kenrick shows that
the buildings originally surrounded two courtyards,
while a large gateway is represented in the centre
of the entrance-block. The manor-house was said
in 1680 to have been lately pulled down by Henry
Earl of Peterborough, and there then remained
only the gatehouse and several barns, stables and
buildings lying on each side of the court leading to
the gatehouse. The courtyards, gardens and orchards
belonging to the gatehouse were inclosed with walls,
hedges and pales, and contained 7 acres, being then
in the tenure of Stephen Stone. (fn. 11)
The middle portion of the original block forms
the present farm-house, and the jambs and fourcentred heads of the moulded brick gateway may still
be seen externally. New windows have been inserted
and the interior entirely modernized, while the gateway has been blocked up and a door and porch of
early 19th-century date inserted. At the rear, parts
of the foundations of the remainder of the original
buildings may be traced. The house appears to have
been built early in the 16th century.
Blechingley House belongs to the Rev. Canon
Barwell, Sandhills to Mr. Henry Lambert, C.B.,
South Park Farm to Mr. A. U. M. Lambert, J.P.,
War Coppice to Mrs. Verner, Harewood House to
Mr. A. H. Lloyd, J.P.
A church house was built in 1905 from the
proceeds of the sale of an older building given for
the same purpose by Mr. Jarvis Kenrick, but now
forming part of the village club. Godstone Union
workhouse is situated in Blechingley.
CASTLE
At the west end of the village, in the
grounds of the modern house of Castle
Hill, the seat of Mr. A. P. Brandt, are
the remains of Blechingley Castle, of which the
foundations and some walls of the square keep containing two chambers and a newel at the north-east
angle are all that survive. The inner and outer moats
can be plainly traced on the north and west, and on
the north-west is a small mound which may mark
the site of a barbican. (fn. 12)
The origin of the castle is unknown. Blechingley,
being the head of the Clare barony in Surrey, was
chosen as the site of a manorial stronghold. The
earthworks may have been thrown up by Richard of
Tonbridge at the end of the 11th century, but are
possibly later. The remains of the masonry defences
point to mid-12th-century work and indicate a
masonry castle of the time of Stephen, a period
during which many such strongholds were erected.
The Clares sided with the barons during the disputes
with the Crown in the 13th century, and in the
wars of 1263–4 Blechingley Castle, so far as is
recorded, for the first and only time was the scene
of military operations. Simon de Montfort, accompanied by Gilbert de Clare, marched by here on
his way to attack the king's army on the coast.
Although the barons won a victory at Lewes, the
Royalises from Tonbridge Castle fell upon the
Londoners who had been driven from the field
and were retreating the way they had come, and
are said to have taken and dismantled Blechingley
Castle, an operation which might have been disastrous
for the barons had they been worsted at Lewes. It
is probable, however, that the castle was not totally
destroyed by this comparatively small force, but that,
having once been dismantled, it fell into neglect and
became gradually ruined. (fn. 13) Aubrey,
writing about 200 years ago, mentions 'one piece of wall of 5 foot
thick' as still remaining. (fn. 14) Manning, in the early 19th century,
says the foundations were still
visible.
The land on which the castle
had stood became separated from
the manor, and appears to have
been held in the 16th century by
the family of Cholmeley, (fn. 15) who
were also seised of land called Unwins (fn. 16) (a name still extant in the
parish), which lay close by the
site below the hill. According to
Manning the site afterwards belonged to the Drakes, who assumed
the name of Brockman in the late
18th century. In 1793 James
Drake Brockman sold it to John
Kenrick, whose brothers, Matthew
and Jarvis, afterwards held in turn.
It belonged to this family when
Brayley wrote, (fn. 17) subsequently to
Mr. James Norris, who built Castle
Hill about 1860, to Mr. Partridge, and now to
Mr. A. P. Brandt.
BOROUGH
The great possessions and continued
residence of the Clares in this part
of Surrey account for the fact that
Blechingley was a place of considerable importance
during their tenure. It was from quite early times
both a market town and a borough. In 1262–3
mention is made of the profits due from shops and
stallage here, (fn. 18) and in 1296 the stalls and tolls of the
market were valued at 16s. yearly. (fn. 19) Account was
rendered in 1325 of 14s. from the same source. (fn. 20)
The market here has long been discontinued, (fn. 21) but
an annual fair at the festival of All Saints, which was
granted to Gilbert de Clare in 1283, (fn. 22) was held as
late as 1891, and a fair on 10 May is still held.
Another fair was held in June. (fn. 23)
An early mention of the borough occurs in 1225–6,
when returns for the hundred of Tandridge refer to
a malefactor dwelling in the borough of Blechingley. (fn. 24)
References to burgage tenure within the manor in the
13th century are also to be found. (fn. 25) A detailed extent
of it is given in 1262–3, when the yearly rent due
from it amounted to 106s. 4d.; rent of shops, stallage,
&c., to 40s., view of frankpledge to half a marg, and
pleas and perquisites of the borough to 20s. The
burgesses owed tallage at the will of the lord for the
knighting of his eldest son or the marriage of his
eldest daughter. (fn. 26) A view of frankpledge was held for
the burgesses and the other tenants, a separate common
fine being payable by the burgesses and by the tenants
of 'Upland.' A portmote was also held for the
burgesses. In 1325 the sum of 109s. 10½d. was
returned as the rent of assize of the borough. (fn. 27)
Plan of the Keep of Blechingley Castle
Blechingley was a mesne borough and was never
incorporated. It was held by the Clares, whose
interest in Surrey was thus represented in the House
of Commons. (fn. 28) Blechingley first returned members
to Parliament in 1295, Richard de Bodekesham and
John de Geyhesham being elected on that occasion.
At the last election in 1831, before Blechingley
was disfranchised by the Reform Bill of 1832, Lord
Palmerston was returned, after his rejection as a
reformer for Cambridge University. Sir Benjamin
Hobhouse, a well-known politician, was member in
1797, and in 1826 William Lamb, afterwards Lord
Melbourne, was elected. But generally the members were chosen from families long settled in the
neighbourhood, who held lands there. There was a
noteworthy election in 1624, (fn. 29) when Henry Lovell
claimed that he should have been returned instead of
John Hayward, and the borough-holders charged
Lovell and also Dr. Harris, rector of Blechingley,
with having attempted in an underhand fashion to
prevent Hayward's return. From the evidence it
appears that Blechingley was, and had always been, a
borough by prescription, the rights of election being
in the borough-holders. (fn. 30) At this election there were
seventeen borough-holders only, summoned by writ
of the sheriff, the rest being absent, and Sir Myles
Fleetwood and Hayward were elected. On the following Sunday the bailiff declared in church that
the borough-holders and also all the other inhabitants
should meet to make a new election, and on this
occasion Lovell was chosen in place of Hayward.
Lovell contended, in support of his own case, that in
certain indentures concerning the returns of burgesses
for Blechingley in 1553 and later, it was said that
the elections had been made not only by the boroughholders but also by 'alii de communitate eiusdem
burgi,' a term which could only apply to the other
inhabitants, not borough-holders, and that his election
was therefore just. This contention was upset by
Parliament, and Lovell was condemned to be committed to the Tower during the pleasure of the
House, and to make his submission and ask pardon at
the bar of the House. The rector, for aiding and
abetting Lovell, was obliged to make a similar submission, and to acknowledge his fault publicly from
the pulpit of his church.
Blechingley always remained a burgage-tenure
borough, and in the hands of the Claytons became a
mere pocket borough, all the votes being the property
of the lord.
Sir Robert Clayton sat for Blechingley in 1698
for the first time, and from that time onward, as long
as the borough was held by the Claytons, one and
sometimes both of its representatives were very frequently members of this family. Manning states that
in his time there were ninety-seven houses in the
borough. (fn. 31) There had formerly been about 130.
Brayley says that towards the close of its history as a
borough the number of voters who actually attended
seldom exceeded eight or ten. (fn. 32) The borough was
sold with the manor in 1816 to Matthew Russell,
who, like the Claytons, had the nomination of both
members, all the burgage tenures being his property. (fn. 33)
Manning says that until 1733 the elections were
held in a house called the Hall. They were then
transferred to the White Hart Inn, lately purchased
by Clayton, and were always afterwards held there. (fn. 34)
MANORS
In 1086 the manor of BLECHINGLEY
was held by Richard de Tonbridge of
the king. (fn. 35) Before this time there had
been three manors, held by Aelfech, Alwin and
Elnod, the assessment being for 10 hides; in 1086
there was one manor only, assessed for 3 hides.
Of the 10 hides Odmus held 2½, Lemei 2, and
Peter 1½ at the time of the Survey. The part held
by Richard himself was worth £12 and that held by
his homagers 73s. 4d. He also held houses in London
and Southwark appurtenant to this manor.
With the exception of the king, Richard was the
largest landholder in Surrey. He was ancestor
of the Earls of Hertford and Gloucester, who
were lords of Blechingley, their chief seat in this
county, until the extinction of the male line of the
Clares in 1314. (fn. 36) They held by knight's service and
by a rent of 5s. called Park-silver, which was paid to
the sheriff for the king's use. (fn. 37)
With the other great Surrey family, the Warennes,
the Clares exercised great influence in this part of the
country on the political dissensions of the time, the
Clares usually supporting the
cause of the barons against
the king. (fn. 38) Gilbert, fourth
holder of the honour of Clare,
was created Earl of Hertford
probably in 1138; he was
succeeded at his death by his
brother Roger, the latter being
the first and only head of this
family who was called neither
Richard nor Gilbert. His son Richard became heir
to the Earl of Gloucester by his marriage with Amice
daughter and eventually sole heir of William FitzRobert Earl of Gloucester. Gilbert, son of Richard
and Amice, was recognized as Earl of Gloucester in
1218. He was succeeded by his son Richard, the
eighth Clare to hold Blechingley, who died in 1262.
Gilbert, son and heir of Richard, surnamed the Red,
opposed the king in the civil war of 1264, but afterwards came over to Henry's side and fought for him
at Evesham. (fn. 39) Having divorced his first wife, Gilbert
married secondly Joan of Acre, daughter of Edward I,
giving up on the occasion of his marriage all his
lands, including Blechingley, to the king, who regranted most of them to the earl and Joan his wife
and their issue. (fn. 40) The earl died in 1295, and
Blechingley was for several years in the king's hands
owing to the minority of the heir. (fn. 41) Joan Countess
of Gloucester and widow of Gilbert died in 1307. (fn. 42)
Their son Gilbert was slain at the battle of Bannockburn in 1314, leaving no issue; his heirs were his
three sisters, Eleanor wife of Hugh le Despenser the
younger, Margaret, who married first Piers Gaveston
and secondly Hugh de Audley the younger, and
Elizabeth wife of John de Burgh; among these three
the extensive lands of the Clares were divided. By
partition made in the Court of Chancery the manor of
Blechingley was apportioned to Margaret. It appears,
however, from a suit concerning the matter a good
many years later that it was the manor only which
she inherited, whilst Eleanor was granted the knights'
fees belonging to it. The suit just referred to raised
the point as to whether if one person was seised of a
manor, and granted the suit and services of a tenant
holding of that manor to a third person, the grantor
or the grantee should make cognizance for arrears. (fn. 43)
It was apparently decided that, the partition having
been made in Chancery, and not by Margaret herself, the actual rent and services due to the manor
must belong to her. (fn. 44) Though Blechingley Manor
continued to be held by Margaret's descendants, there
are inquisitions in which Tandridge (q.v.), the particular manor under discussion in the case just quoted, is
mentioned among the knights' fees held by Eleanor's
descendants.
Clare. Or three cheverons gules.
Hugh de Audley, Margaret's second husband, was
declared a contrariant in 1321,
and his lands were seized, an
action due to his neglect of
various commands sent him
by the king requiring his presence, and to his refusal to
serve the king in any way. (fn. 45)
He took part in the insurrection of 1322, but was pardoned
in 1327 on the revolution
being accomplished, and his
lands were restored. (fn. 46) He was
afterwards created Earl of
Gloucester. The earl died in
1347, when, his wife Margaret being already dead, his
daughter and heir Margaret wife of Ralph de Stafford
inherited Blechingley. (fn. 47) Ralph was created Earl of
Stafford in 1351, (fn. 48) and this family, the members of
which after 1444 also bore the title of Duke of
Buckingham, (fn. 49) continued to hold Blechingley until
the attainder and execution of Henry second Duke
of Buckingham in 1483. (fn. 50)
Audley. Gules fretty or.
The manor, thus forfeited to the king, remained in
the Crown until Henry VII
in the first year of his reign
granted it to Katherine, widow
of the Duke of Buckingham
and then Duchess of Bedford,
to hold in dower, (fn. 51) and her
son Edward, third Duke of
Buckingham, having been restored in lands and honours,
afterwards held it. (fn. 52) He was
attainted and beheaded in
1521, when Blechingley finally
passed from the family who
had held it for so long.
Stafford. Or a cheveron gules.
Henry VIII granted Blechingley in 1522 to Sir
Nicholas Carew and Elizabeth his wife and to their
issue male. (fn. 53) After the attainder and death of Carew
and the consequent forfeiture of his lands, Elizabeth,
his widow, petitioned the king through Cromwell to be
allowed to keep Blechingley and Wallington, with lands
in Sussex, the whole to amount annually to about
300 marks, 'under which she cannot honestly live.' (fn. 54)
By a letter of the same date (March 1539) to
Cromwell her mother thanked him for sending word of
the king's kindness in allowing Elizabeth to keep lands
in Sussex, but begged that, as there was no house on
it where her daughter could lie, she might keep
Blechingley also, as she had 'not been used to strait
living.' (fn. 55) The petition seems, however, to have had
no effect, as in 1540 the manor of Blechingley was
granted to Anne of Cleves for life, on her divorce
from the king, in consideration of her willingness to
remain in England and to renounce her marriage. (fn. 56)
Sir Thomas Cawarden was appointed keeper of the
manor, (fn. 57) and in 1546 he received a grant in fee of the
reversion after the death of Anne of Cleves, (fn. 58) which
occurred in 1557. Sir Thomas, who was a gentleman
of the Privy Chamber, and who also held the offices
of Master of the Revels and Master of the Tents to
Henry VIII, (fn. 59) died in 1559, William Cawarden;
his nephew, being his heir. (fn. 60) The latter alienated
the manor in the following year to William Lord
Howard of Effingham and Margaret his wife. (fn. 61)
Charles, theirson, Lord High Admiral and Commander
of the English Fleet in 1588, created Earl of
Nottingham in 1596, afterwards held Blechingley, (fn. 62)
and during his tenure an attempt was made by
Francis Carew, heir of Sir Nicholas, to obtain the
estate. William Lord Burghley, as Lord Treasurer,
and others, ordered him to renounce his claim, (fn. 63)
and in 1575 he quitclaimed all right to Charles Lord
Howard and Margaret his mother. (fn. 64) The admiral
did not die until 1624, but he had previously given
up his estate at Blechingley to his son William
Lord Howard, who in 1602 addressed a letter to
'my loving tenants of my manor of Blechingley,'
telling them he had assigned 5 or 6 acres in the
common of Horne, parcel of Blechingley, to Henry
Jeffrey, a servant who had attended his father in his
voyage to Cadiz. (fn. 65) William, who was summoned to
Parliament in his father's barony of Effingham in
1603, (fn. 66) died in 1615, leaving a daughter Elizabeth,
on whom he had settled the manor a short time
previously. (fn. 67) Charles, brother of William, on whom
the contingent remainder was settled, made an unsuccessful claim at William's death. (fn. 68) Elizabeth
afterwards married John first Earl of Peterborough, (fn. 69)
who died in 1644. Henry, their son, second Earl of
Peterborough, compounded for his estates in 1646 and
again in 1649. (fn. 70) John Mordaunt, Viscount Avalon,
their second son, was an ardent Royalist, and his
estates were sequestrated in 1659, (fn. 71) when some discussion arose as to whether he held any estate at
Blechingley beyond what was allowed him of free
will by the Dowager Countess of Peterborough,
amounting to about £500 per annum coming from
both Blechingley and Reigate. (fn. 72) In 1667 he was
holding an annual rent of £300 from the manor of
Blechingley. (fn. 73) An Act of Parliament was obtained
in 1677 to enable Mary, the daughter and heir of the
Earl of Peterborough, then under age, to release her
interest in the manor, (fn. 74) and in July of that year it
was accordingly sold to Sir
Robert Clayton and John
Morris, (fn. 75) one of the trustees
being John Evelyn, who writes
in his diary, 'I sealed the
deedes of sale of the manor of
Blechinglee to Sir Robert
Clayton for payment of Lord
Peterborough's debts, accordingly to the trust of the Act
of Parliament.' (fn. 76) Morris at
his death left his property to
his partner Clayton. (fn. 77) The
latter, a man of humble origin,
had been apprenticed to his
uncle, a scrivener in London, from whom he afterwards inherited a fortune, and made his way rapidly.
He held many important offices in London, and was
sheriff in 1672 and Lord May or in 1679–80. Evelyn
refers to him as 'this prince of citizens, there never
having been any who, for the great stateliness of his
palace, prodigious feasting and magnificence, exceeded
him. He was a discreet magistrate and, tho' envied,
I think without much cause.' (fn. 78) He was also member of Parliament for Blechingley. He died in 1707,
leaving no issue, having devised Blechingley to his
nephew William Clayton, who was created a baronet
in 1732. (fn. 79) He married Martha Kenrick and was
succeeded by his son Sir Kenrick Clayton. Sir
Robert, the third baronet, became deeply involved in
debt and sold the reversion of Blechingley in 1788 to
a cousin, John Kenrick, nephew of Martha. (fn. 80) It
passed successively to his brothers Matthew and
Jarvis Kenrick, the latter holding in 1808. (fn. 81) In
1816 the manor was sold to Matthew Russell, after
whose death in 1835 it passed by purchase to John
Perkins. (fn. 82) John Perkins died intestate in 1846, and
his estate was divided among his four surviving sisters.
Clara Matilda Charles (sic) Perkins took (inter alia) the
manor of Blechingley, of which the monetary value
was small. She died in 1870 and left it to her niece
Margaret Mayers, who died the same year and was
succeeded by her brother Colonel John Perkins Mayers.
He died in 1877, and her estate was conveyed to
Sir George Macleay, K.C.M.G., after whose death in
1891 his trustees sold it in 1893 to Mr. William
Abraham Bell.
Clayton. Argent a cross between four roundels sable.
Two parks were included in the manor of Blechingley. These were inclosed before 1233. (fn. 83) In
1262 the pasture in the parks was worth 40s. yearly,
pannage 50s., and underwood and deadwood were
also valued. (fn. 84) In 1296 the annual value of the
pannage there was 60s. (fn. 85) They were known by 1403
as the North and South Parks, (fn. 86) and later they are
also called the Little and Great Parks respectively.
They followed the same descent as the manor (q.v.).
Records of trespass, of deer stealing and of appointments of keepers of the park are occasionally found. (fn. 87)
In 1523, after Buckingham's death, £4 11s. was
rendered from Ambrose Skelton and John Scott,
keepers of the North and South Parks. (fn. 88) Tithes from
the South Park were due to the rectory in 1536. (fn. 89)
In 1540 Sir Thomas Cawarden was made keeper of
the parks and master of the hunt of deer there. (fn. 90) In
the grant made of the parks to Anne of Cleves they
were said to be 'of two leagues,' (fn. 91) this being apparently
their circumference.
The homagers presented in 1680 that 'the
demesnes did heretofore consist of two parks, Little
and Great, now called the North and South Park,
but are and have been for many years disparked and
laid into several farms.' (fn. 92) The North Park contained
1,135 a. 22 p., the South 1,681 a. 28 p.; the boundaries of the parks are lost, but the names are still
retained in the parish. (fn. 93)
The land called HEXSTALLS was at one time
held as a manor, or reputed manor. After Buckingham's attainder Sir Nicholas Carew in 1523 received
a grant in tail-male of a messuage and 200 acres in
Blechingley, formerly called Hexstalles, part of Buckingham's lands. (fn. 94) After Carew's death the 'farm of
Hexstalles,' lately in the occupation of John Lad, was
demised for twenty-one years to Jasper Horsey. (fn. 95) It
was included in the life grant made to Anne of
Cleves, (fn. 96) and the reversion of it, as the 'manor or farm
of Hexstalles,' was afterwards granted to Sir Thomas
Cawarden. (fn. 97) About this period it is frequently referred
to as a manor, being always held with Blechingley
(q.v.), with which it seems to have afterwards
descended. (fn. 98)
In 1086 Richard de Tonbridge held in demesne
CHIVINGTON (Civentone) in Blechingley, assessed
for 6 hides, (fn. 99) and at this time possibly the principal
manor. It does not, however, seem to have been
afterwards held as a separate manor, but apparently
became very early merged in Blechingley. It is still a
hamlet east of the main village.
At the time of the Domesday Survey there was a
mill in Chivington Manor worth 32d. (fn. 100) A water
mill worth 10s. and a windmill worth 33s. 4d. were
among the appurtenances of Blechingley Manor in
1262. (fn. 101) In 1296 the water mill had been demised
to farm for a rent of 20s., and the windmill was
described as 'new, and of no value because broken.' (fn. 102)
The latter is represented by Blechingley Mill, which is
the windmill between the site of the castle and Nutfield.
Two water mills and four dovecots were included
among the appurtenances of the manor in the time
of Elizabeth, and are mentioned in 1735. (fn. 103)
The manor of GARSTON, GASTON or GASSON
may perhaps be traced to the early 13th century,
when William son of Eustace de Garston granted
land in Blechingley to Hugh son of Asketun de
Chivington, reserving a rent of 5d., and also granted
a virgate in Tandridge to Adam le Butteler, who
married his daughter Agnes. (fn. 104) In 1229 William de
Garston quitclaimed 2½ hides in Blechingley to
the Prior of Rochester. (fn. 105) A conveyance between
Roger de Garston and Reginald de Garston, dealing
with a messuage, two mills, 140 acres of land, 9 acres
of meadow, 60 acres of wood, a rent of 28s. 2d., and
2 lb. of pepper is recorded in 1303. (fn. 106) In 1364
Roger son and heir of John atte Garston granted to
William de Burton, goldsmith, of London, all his right
in the land and rent which he had inherited from his
father in Blechingley. (fn. 107) In 1418 a manor of Garston
was held by Robert de Chichele and Elizabeth his
wife. (fn. 108) Probably these held as lessees of the Prior of
Tandridge (of whom the Garston family above mentioned may have been tenants),
as in 1505 this priory was
found to be holding Garston
as a manor, (fn. 109) and held it until
the Dissolution. (fn. 110)
Rede of Oatlands. Or a griffon azure holding in his beak a sprig of leaves.
In 1538 the manor of Garston was granted, with the
other possessions of the priory,
to John Rede in tail-male, (fn. 111) in
return for the surrender of
Oatlands to the king. He
died in 1545 and was succeeded by his son John, during whose minority an uncle,
Thomas Rede, held. (fn. 112) In
1577 John sold the manor to
Henry Hayward, (fn. 113) who made a settlement of the
manor on his son John and Agnes his wife; he died
in 1611. (fn. 114) John settled it in 1614 on his second
wife Elizabeth, widow of William Watts and daughter
of William Angell. (fn. 115) In 1630 another settlement
was made, on William eldest son of John and Elizabeth, Humphrey, his eldest son by the previous marriage, being disinherited because he had 'been always
a disobedient child.' (fn. 116) William Hayward was afterwards knighted, and in 1681 he, with Martha his wife,
conveyed the manor to John Burrough. (fn. 117)
In 1691 John Bourrough joined with William
Hayward (fn. 118) in conveying to Michael Edwards of
Kingston. (fn. 119) Sir James Edwards, bart., his nephew,
afterwards held, and, dying in 1702, left it to his son
James, (fn. 120) who sold to Sir Joseph Jekyll in 1713. (fn. 121) Sir
Joseph Jekyll died without issue in 1738, having devised
his property to twelve relations. (fn. 122) A decree for sale
was made in 1749, (fn. 123) and by Acts of Parliament in
1751 and 1753 two out of the twelve parts, belonging
to the heirs of two of the original devisees who had
died, were vested in trustees for purposes of sale with
the bulk of the property, the said heirs being both
infants. (fn. 124) In 1753 the ten remaining devisees conveyed ten twelfths of the manor of Garston to Sir
Kenrick Clayton, (fn. 125) who presumably obtained the
other parts also, and it was afterwards held by his
family, who retained it when they sold the reversion
of Blechingley Manor (fn. 126) (q.v.). Sir William Clayton
was lord of the manor in 1841, (fn. 127) but the manorial
rights are now lost. (fn. 128) The house is now the seat of
Mr. Stanley Boulter, J.P.
In 1509 Thomas Uvedale quitclaimed all his right
in the manor of PENDHILL or PENDELL or
BABERNON to Henry Saunder. (fn. 129) It was held in
1568 by William Saunder son of Henry, (fn. 130) and
afterwards by Nicholas, who in 1592 conveyed
to William Brend. (fn. 131) In 1613 John Tyndall and
Margaret his wife held in the right of Margaret,
possibly the heiress of Brend. (fn. 132) Tyndall in 1617
conveyed to George Holman, (fn. 133) who built Pendell
Court about 1624. (fn. 134) Robert Holman son of George
died in 1664, (fn. 135) and after the death without issue
of his sons, Mary his daughter, wife of Thomas
Seyliard of Penshurst in Kent, became his heir. (fn. 136)
She afterwards married Thomas Lee and held Pendell
jointly with her husband in 1686. (fn. 137) Her son John
Seyliard (fn. 138) afterwards held it and died in 1744 or
1745. In 1750 John Seyliard, son of the latter, died,
leaving his manor-house called Pendell and lands to
his wife Isabel for life with reversion to his daughters
and heirs, Henrietta Maria and Ann, both under
age. (fn. 139) According to Manning, Ann, who apparently
survived her sister, died in 1760, (fn. 140) when her cousin
Hester Wade Seyliard, wife of George Scullard,
inherited. (fn. 141) She after her husband's death gave the
estate to John Perkins, her step-brother, whose son
John Perkins acquired the manor of Blechingley
in 1835, (fn. 142) with which Pendell Court has subsequently
descended.
The rent rolls of Pendell from Henry VII to Elizabeth are in the possession of Mr. Jarvis Kenrick.
The house called Pendell Court, though not the
manor-house of Pendell or Blechingley, was formerly
occupied by the Perkins family (fn. 143) and by Sir George
Macleay, and is now the residence of Mr. Bell. For
description of it see above.
Land in HAM in Blechingley was held by a family of
that name in the 13th century, and in 1271–2 Reginald
de la Hamme exchanged lands there with John de
Hever. (fn. 144) The estate afterwards belonged to the family
of Turner, which was settled in this parish as early as
the reign of Richard II. Richard Turner was member
for Blechingley in the Parliament of 1396–7. (fn. 145) In
1607 John Turner died seised of the capital messuage
called Ham, which his father of the same name had
held before him, and his son, also called John, succeeded him. (fn. 146) In 1638 the constable of Blechingley
complained that he had by warrant from the sheriff
distrained Mr. Turner by his cattle for ship-money in
1636, but that the distress had been forcibly rescued
by Turner's servants, who were therefore called upon
with their master to answer the charge. (fn. 147) In 1647
John Turner, having been nominated High Sheriff of
Surrey, petitioned to be dismissed from serving, on the
plea that being very old he was infirm and had not
left his house for nearly a year and that he had moreover suffered great loss, chiefly
through the billeting of soldiers
on himself and his tenants, so
that his revenue was then
scarcely sufficient to support
his family. (fn. 148) The last John
Turner died intestate in 1713,
but he had previously sold
Ham, the purchaser, according to Manning, being a
certain Mr. Budgen, father
of Thomas Budgen, M.P.,
whose son John Smith Budgen
died in 1804 and was succeeded by his son Thomas,
who held in 1808. (fn. 149) It was
purchased from this family before 1844 by Mr. King. (fn. 150)
It is now occupied as a farm-house. The gateway,
which had the date 1611 on it, was pulled down in
1843, but portions of the old house remain, with
some panelling dated 1585, and a fine chimney-piece
of about that date.
Pendell, Blechingley: South Front
Budgen. Party vert and argent a cheveron ermine with three crescents in the chief counter changed.
Ham, which lies detached from Blechingley, was
united to Nutfield in 1894. (fn. 151)
A family called Stangrave held land in Blechingley
as early as the 13th century. In 1251 Joan de
Stangrave conveyed three burgages and 13 acres of
land there to Robert Cook. (fn. 152) In 1258 John de
Stangrave was seneschal to the Earl of Gloucester, (fn. 153)
in whom the overlordship of these lands lay. (fn. 154) In
1303 Robert de Stangrave received a grant of free
warren in his lands of STANGRAVE. (fn. 155) Later he
by the name of Robert de Stangrave, kt., granted to
Walter de Godstone all his lands called Stangravesdowne. (fn. 156) In 1322 he lodged a complaint against
certain persons who had broken into and hunted in
his park at Stangrave. (fn. 157) He received licence in 1326
for an oratory in his manor of Stangrave and it was
renewed in 1331. (fn. 158) In 1356 Sir Robert, possibly son
of the above, received licence to retain 50 acres of land
which he had acquired from Ralph Earl of Stafford,
of whose manor of Blechingley they formed part. (fn. 159)
He died in 1360 seised of the tenement called Stangrave, John Breton, kt., being his kinsman and heir. (fn. 160)
In 1372 Ralph Earl of Stafford died seised of it, (fn. 161)
but the overlord seems afterwards to have enfeoffed
another family of these lands. (fn. 162) According to Manning
and other authorities, Edward Barber of Blechingley
held Stangrave at his death in 1580, when it passed
by the marriage of his daughter Elizabeth to the
family of Beecher of Kent, in whose hands it remained
until 1676, when a daughter and heiress conveyed it
by marriage to Thomas Northey, ancestor of Millicent
Parkhurst, who with her sisters sold the property to
the Clayton family. (fn. 163) The Northeys pulled down
the old house in 1740 and built one called Ivy
House. (fn. 164) This was also pulled down a few years
ago, and a third house has been recently built. It is
now the property of Mr. Arthur Henry Brandt.
Plan of Blechingley Church
CHURCH
The church of ST. MARY consists
of a chancel, modern clergy and quire
vestries on the north side, south or
Clayton chapel, nave, north transept or Ham chapel,
modern north aisle, south aisle, west tower and south
porch. (fn. 165)
The earliest part of the present church appears to
be the tower, which is possibly of early 12th-century date, but which may possibly have been
added to a still earlier nave, incorporating its west
wall. A larger nave was added about 1180, of which
the north wall possibly still exists above the modern
arcade, and the present tower arch was inserted at
the same time.
Early in the 13th century the chancel seems to
have been largely rebuilt and the south chapel added
a little later. The lancets in the south wall of the
chapel can be seen outside, while the good state of preservation of the south door would seem to show that
a 13th-century porch preceded the present one. In
the first half of the 15th century large alterations
were made, the south arcade of the aisle was taken
down and rebuilt,
and at this date the
chancel arch and
south arcade of the
chancel were enlarged and a north
transept added to the
nave; later in the
same century new
windows appear to
have been inserted
in the south chapel
and tower. No
further alterations or
additions appear to
have been made till
the 19th century,
when about the year
1845 a north aisle
was added, with an
arcade to match the
south arcade, a new
window inserted in
the north transept
and the south aisle
windows altered to
their present form.
In the year 1906
the south and east
walls of the church were refaced and all details renewed, and in the year 1910 the tower underwent
a similar process, the coat of rough-cast given to it
in the 18th century being removed. It was found
that all the dressings had been so hacked about to
afford a key that no alternative was possible.
In the east wall of the chancel are three grouped
lancet windows. These are almost entirely modern.
The former east window was of late 15th-century
date and the position of its jambs can still be traced
externally. In the course of its removal fragments of
13th-century jamb mouldings were uncovered which
have been worked into the present windows. At the
east end of the north wall is a late 12th-century
window, now blocked. West of this is a peculiar
wall-arcade of three plain two-centred arches with
chamfered jambs of about 1235. In the easternmost
bay is a stone seat. Above is a lancet window, the
jambs splayed to the whole width of the bay with a
string course at the sill level. The lower part of the
middle bay is occupied by a 13th-century doorway
with a 15th-century four-centred head with blank
shields in the spandrels. The 13th-century string
course is continued in this bay, following round the
splays of the doorway, the head of which rises above
it. Above the doorway is a lancet window like that
in the east bay, but considerably shorter, the sill
being raised to clear the doorway below. The
upper portion of the western bay is now open, the
organ being placed in a modern chamber adjoining
the north side of the chancel. The south side of
the chancel consists of an early 15th-century arcade
of two unequal bays with two-centred arches of two
orders with a double ogee and a deep casement.
The arches are supported by a pier of four threequarter shafts on an inner square with hollowchamfered angles. The shafts have moulded bases
and capitals with octagonal abaci, and stand on
double plinths of the same form. The inner order
is received upon the east respond by a short shaft
similarly moulded and supported by a corbel sculptured with an angel holding a shield charged with a
cheveron. The mouldings of the outer order on the
chancel side die on to the east wall and on the chapel
side are received upon a plain chamfer. The west
respond continues the outer orders, and the inner
order is carried by a shaft answering to the pier shafts.
It seems to have been originally contemplated to fill
the east bay, which is the smaller of the two, with
some sort of stone screen-work or tomb canopy, as
the lower portion of the east face of the pier is
squared out to form an abutment and the shaft on
this face is cut away a short distance below its capital.
The original intention, however, was never carried
out. The finished portion with its miniature
buttress-work shows that the projected design was an
elaborate one. The chancel arch, which is considerably to the south of the nave centre, is four-centred,
with a label on the nave side, and is of the same date
and detail as the chancel arcade. It has short shafts for
the inner order on corbels sculptured with angels,
holding on the north an open book and on the south
a viol. The outer order dies on to the walls except at
the north-west, where the north wall of the nave
allows sufficient space for it to be brought down whole
to the springing. The east wall of the chancel was
recently refaced externally with rough Tilburstow
stone.
In the east wall of the south chapel is a window of
three cinquefoiled lights with a segmental head,
which was blocked early in the 18th century when the
huge Clayton monument was erected, and is visible
from the outside only. There is a similar window,
but drop-centred, in the south wall. The glass-line
of both windows is near the centre of the wall.
At the east end of the south wall is a 14th-century
piscina grooved for a shelf, with a trefoiled head and
projecting basin on a corbel carved with a small
animal conceived with great spirit. The wall is
rubble-faced and has been carefully restored without disturbing these features. An arch like those
of the south arcade of the chancel opens to the south
aisle. Visible externally in the west part of the south
wall is a small built-up lancet window, and to the
east of it the west jamb of a second. Both have a
rebate for a shutter and date from c. 1200. To the
west of these, near the ground, is a round hole, also
blocked up, the origin and purpose of which is
uncertain.
In the north-west corner of the nave is a projection
of masonry of 15th-century date with an embattled
cornice at the level of the springing of the chancel arch,
and the eastern arch of the north transept arch, its
faces lining with their responds. In the west face is
a shallow trefoil-headed niche, on the jambs and head
of which are remains of former painting of white
stars on a red ground. It had originally an embattled
canopy, similarly painted, since cut away flush with
the face. This masonry was doubtless added to
make a niche for the nave altar without weakening
the support of the chancel arch.
The transept arch is also of the 15th century and
is like those of the chancel arcade; the carving on
the east corbel of the inner order is cut away, but the
western one is sculptured with a serpent on a hemisphere, the upper edge of which appears to be fringed
with leaves. The remainder of the north side of the
nave is occupied by a modern arcade of three bays, a
facsimile of the south arcade, which is of four bays
with two-centred arches of two moulded orders, and
the details are in every respect similar to those of the
south arcade of the chancel, with which it corresponds in date. The east and west responds continue
the outer order, the inner order being carried by
shafts answering to the pier shafts.
The details of the north transept are modern.
The north aisle has three north windows and one
west window of 15th-century pattern.
At the east end of the south wall of the south aisle
is a small four-centred doorway leading to a rood
stair, and above it, at the level of the former gallery,
a similar doorway. The stairs are contained within
a projecting turret and are continued upwards to the
aisle roof. The rood was erected at the same time
as the chancel arch and the nave altar, for the
mouldings at the north spring are unfaced. To the
west of the rood-stair door are three modern windows
like those of the north aisle. Between the two
westernmost is the south doorway, a good example of
mid-13th-century work. Externally the two-centred
head is of two characteristically moulded orders with
shafted jambs. The shafts and their capitals have
been restored, but the head has been left practically
untouched. There is an external label, stopped on
the east by a mask-stop and on the west by a head.
In the west wall is a window of the same design as
those in the south wall. There is a consecration
cross cut in the west jamb.
Externally the aisle has been entirely refaced and
the embattled parapet and cornice renewed. The
embattled turret containing the rood stair rises above
the general parapet level. On plan it is square with
the western angles truncated. Between the two
eastern windows is a modern buttress of two off-sets.
This was added in 1910, the remains of an original
buttress having been discovered in the process of
refacing the wall.
The tower, which has been entirely refaced, appears
to date from c. 1100. It is of three receding stages,
with a cornice and embattled parapet. The tower
arch is a plain two-centred arch, with nook-shafted
responds and moulded abaci. The foliation of the
shaft capitals is carried in a band around the faces of
the responds, and is of a more advanced type on the
south than on the north respond. In the north and
south walls of the ground stage are small semicircular-headed windows with wide internal splays.
The west doorway is entirely modern. Immediately
above it is a late 15th-century window of three
cinquefoiled lights within a dropped two-centred
head renewed externally. The ringing stage has on
the north two small round-headed windows and one
in the south wall. The belfry has two-light modern
windows with segmental heads, copied from the previous late 15th-century windows, on the north, west
and south. The east window of the belfry is of two
round-headed lights, with a circular central shaft
having a foliated capital, also modern, but replacing
a 12th-century window formerly in this position.
The outer doorway of the 15th-century south
porch has a four-centred head with a square label and
traceried spandrels. This has been almost entirely
renewed. In the east wall is a small square-headed
window. Immediately over the doorway in the south
wall is an original square-headed niche with a modern
figure of the Virgin and Child. The parvise is
lighted by a two-light cinquefoiled segmental-headed
window, drastically restored. At the north end of
the west wall is a small doorway with four-centred
head, which forms the only means of entrance. This
must formerly have had an external stair, probably of
wood. The whole is crowned by a cornice and embattled parapet with panelled and crocketed pinnacles
at the angles.
The chancel has an original 15th-century trussed
rafter roof with embattled cornices. The south
chapel has a similar roof, but with two cambered and
chamfered tie-beams and plain cornices. The nave
has a similar 15th-century roof, with the addition of
cambered and moulded tie-beams supported by wall-posts and curved braces carried on stone grotesque
corbels, mostly unrestored. The king posts and
longitudinal purlin are modern reinforcements. The
low-pitched lean-to roof of the south aisle is also of
the 15th century, and has a central purlin and principals, with carved bosses at their intersections supported by wall-posts and curved braces, the spandrels
being filled with vertical tracery. The wall-posts
rest on grotesque head corbels. The roofs of the
chancel and nave are covered externally with slates,
while the south aisle roof is leaded. The modern
north aisle has a tiled roof.
The font is of 15th-century date, and is octagonal,
with panelled faces to the bowl and stem. By the
pulpit is an hour-glass stand, which with its wroughtiron bracket is probably of the early 17th century.
On the floor at the east end of the north aisle is a
brass to Thomas Warde, who died 21 August 1541,
and Jane his wife, with figures in civil dress, and at
the top of the slab the symbol of the Trinity.
At the east end of the south aisle in the floor is a
stone slab with three brass plates containing the figures
of six boys, six girls and five girls respectively. (fn. 166) The
third plate originally belonged elsewhere. At the
top of the slab are two shields: (1) A cheveron
engrailed between three scallops, impaling a cheveron
between three rings; (2) the dexter coat alone.
In the chancel floor to the north of the altar is
the brass of a priest in full vestments, without inscription, which seems to be of mid-15th-century date.
Above the figure is a shield with a cheveron between
three choughs. Another brass of the 16th century is
the figure of an unmarried woman with flowing hair.
Under the eastern arch of the south arcade of the
chancel is the altar tomb of Sir Thomas Cawarden,
who died in 1559. In the panel at the west end
is a bow between two pheons. The panels at the
sides are sculptured with large roses. On the slab is
a brass plate with the following fine inscription:—
'The epitaphe of Sr Thomas Cawarden | Knyght who
dyed the 25 day of August | Anno Domini 1559. |
They, that olde tymes preferre before our dayes
For courage, vertue, witte, or godly zeale,
But hearinge of Sir Thomas Caw'rden's preyse
In servinge God, his Prince, the common weale,
Will yelde to us and seye: was never none
Paste him, that lyeth underneath this stone.
Which leaste his foes shoulde it denye for spighte
Three have accorded by rewards to prove;
Kynge Henry, who for service made him Knighte,
His countrey, which for justice geues him love;
And God, who for to make full recompence
To place in heaven with his, did take him hence.'
This plate was placed on the tomb in modern
times, having been discovered in a lumber room at
Loseley. (fn. 167) On the west wall of the south chapel is
a brass tablet to the memory of Richard Glydd of
Pendell, who died in the year 1681. The inscription is as follows:—
'The Glory be to God alone | To the Memory of
A Good Man prudent as well as | pious, One that in
his time was very useful, being | alway ready to do
his good Offices to all Sorts of | People. Richard Glyd
Esqr deceased, sometime of | Pendhill in this Parish
of Bletchingley & once A | Worthy Treasurer of
Christ's Hospital London | dureing 11 years who
Wth Eliz. (Evans) his Wife | Lyes Buryed here nigh.
By her he had Several Children vizt. Richard, John,
Abraham, Charles, Elizth | Ann and Mary. John,
Charles, Abraham & | Mary dyed young unmarried.
Eliz. dyed & left | no Child but was married first to
Mr Willm | Bewley & then to Mr Richard Chandler, | ; Ann was married to Mr Willm Waylet | and has
had many Children. | Richard and his Sister Elizth
were rare | and Excellent Christians and also | Gifted
with very Choice and great Endo- | wmts of mind,
Insomuch as to have | been Kin to them is to have
been Kin | to Greatness and Nobility indeed | that
is to Vertue and Goodness | This Richard Glyd the
son (who Lyes Bur- | yed here nigh) by Ann (Stoughton) his Wife | had eight Children vizt John Richd &
Laurence, | Martha, two Elizths & two Anns. John
Lived to | be a Barrester of Grays Inn of Some years
Stand- | ing & in Practice being a Lawyer of Sound
Judgmt | good Learning & very fair Reputation as well
for | his Morals as for his Religion. And being one
of | the Parliament Men for this Borrough of Bletch | ingley, so dyed, | unmarried | A.D. MDCLXXXIX
& | Lyes Buryed here nigh. Laurence, Richd | & one
of ye Elizths & one of ye Annsdyed Children. | Martha
was married to Mr Ralph Drake & both | He & She
Lye burryed here nigh having Left Six | Children:
ye other Elizth lived till about 18 & then | dyed unmarried: & lyes Buryed here nigh the | other Ann
is married to Willm Brockman of | Beachburrough in
Kent Esqr & has Children | Recollected A.D. MDCC
by (M G) one of ye obliged Nephews of the abovesd.
Treasurer.'
The most conspicuous monument in the church is
the immense Clayton memorial at the east end of
the south chapel. This is of white marble with
Corinthian columns supporting a curved pediment
crowned by urns, arms and weeping angels framing
the life-size figures of Sir Robert Clayton (Lord Mayor
of London 1679–80) and his lady, the former in the
robes of his mayoralty. Between them is the recumbent figure of their infant son. The inscription states
that ' he fixt the seat of his family at Marden, where
he left a remarkable instance of the politeness of his
genius, and how far Nature may be improv'd by Art.'
He died at Marden in the year 1707. A fine
wrought-iron railing surrounds the monument.
In the churchyard close to the east end of the south
aisle wall is a slab with the matrices of a figure of a
priest, and a shield above.
There is a peal of eight bells, all by Thomas
Janaway, 1780.
The communion plate consists of nine pieces: a
chalice of 1568, cover paten of the same date, almsdish of 1850, a chalice of 1851 with cover, paten
(not silver), glass flagon silver mounted of 1901, two
similar flagons of 1900, and a large flagon of 1733,
inscribed 'The Gift of Sr William Clayton Bart. to
the Parish Church of Blechingly in Surrey in 1733.'
Below the inscription are engraved the arms of the
donor; also a paten, with foot, of 1707, engraved
with a shield charged with a griffon having a blank
chief.
The registers are in seven volumes: (i) 1538 to
1596; (ii) 1597 to 1673 (gap in marriages 1653 to
1661); (iii) 1654 to 1695; (iv) 1695 to 1714;
(v) baptisms and burials 1715 to 1812, marriages
1715 to 1754; (vi) marriages 1754 to 1776; (vii)
marriages 1777 to 1812.
A book of churchwardens' accounts of the 16th
century is preserved.
There are Wesleyan and Congregational chapels
and a Friends' meeting-house in the parish.
ADVOWSON
Roger de Clare Earl of Hertford,
who was lord of Blechingley after the
death of his brother in 1152 until
his own death in 1173, gave the church to the
Cluniac priory of St. Pancras at Lewes, (fn. 168) the grant
being afterwards confirmed by Gilbert de Clare. (fn. 169)
The confirmation of the priory charters made by
Henry de Blois, who was Bishop of Winchester
1129–71, includes among their churches that of
Blechingley. (fn. 170) At what period the advowson once
more became the property of the Clares is not certain.
Richard Earl of Gloucester, who died in 1262, does
not appear to have held it at his death (fn. 171) ; his son,
Gilbert the Red, however, was certainly patron of
the church, of which he was seised when he died in
1295. (fn. 172) Possibly it was taken into the king's hands
during the war with France and restored by him to
his son-in-law Gilbert the Red, or the continued
opposition of the great Surrey families of the Clares
and Warennes, which became very active on the
outbreak of civil war in 1263, may have been responsible for a surrender by the priory of St. Pancras,
which had been founded by and was under the protection of the Warennes. The patronage henceforth
remained in the hands of the Clares. (fn. 173) In 1315
confirmation was made to the master and brethren of
the hospital of St. Thomas at Southwark of a grant
to them by Gilbert late Earl of Gloucester, made in
1313, of the advowson of Blechingley, with licence
to appropriate the church. (fn. 174) This grant, if it ever
took effect, must have been cancelled very shortly
after. In 1317 leave of absence for one year
was granted to Robert de Chivington, rector of
Blechingley, at the request of Hugh le Despenser,
husband of Eleanor, eldest sister and co-heir of Gilbert
de Clare, (fn. 175) and in 1320 Maud de Clare, Gilbert's
widow, was stated to be patron. (fn. 176) The church, with
the manor of Blechingley, became the property of
Margaret, youngest sister of Gilbert and wife of Hugh
de Audley the younger, (fn. 177) and henceforth followed the
descent of the manor (q.v.) until the late 18th
century. (fn. 178) Robert Clayton, who was lord of
Blechingley 1769–99, sold the advowson to Richard
Troward in 1790, (fn. 179) having, however, previously
given the next presentation to Matthew Kenrick.
When Dr. Thomas, the incumbent, was made
Bishop of Rochester, Matthew Kenrick, son of the
elder Matthew, was presented by the king. After
his death in 1803 a presentation was made by Jarvis
Kenrick, (fn. 180) after which the patronage reverted to
Troward. (fn. 181) Later the advowson came into the hands
of the Duke of Norfolk, after whose death, in 1815,
it passed to Mr. Ward, whose heirs held it in 1836.
Mr. H. Chawner was patron in 1841, and so remained
until after 1870, when the advowson passed to
Mr. Robert Few. (fn. 182) In 1882–3 it became the property
of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, in whose gift it
still is.
In 1548 particulars were given concerning the
rents, amounting to 13s. 3½d., from three parcels of
land in Blechingley and Horne. The first was given
by an unknown person for the finding of certain
lights in Blechingley Church; the second and third
provided in the names of Henry Tanner and Thomas
Beccher for a lamp to be burnt and for a mass to be
said annually for the donor in the chapel of Horne. (fn. 183)
A case before the court of High Commission is
recorded in 1638, in which it appears that John
Blundell of Blechingley was tried and punished because
on Whit Sunday he, with a warrant to arrest Robert
Betts, arrested him about a quarter of an hour after
evening prayer, in the churchyard of Blechingley,
'and upon some struggling rent a skirt in the said
Betts's doublet,' and further because, in the church of
Blechingley, Blundell, 'in a saucy and scornful manner
desired Mr. Hampton, the rector, to make him a churchwarden of the parish for that it was a gainful place.'
Having thus violated the liberties of the church and
of consecrated ground, he was enjoined to make public
submission in church, to pay costs of the suit and a
fine. (fn. 184)
CHARITIES
The history of the Grammar
School founded by deeds by Mr.
John Whatman 8 September 1564
has been already dealt with. (fn. 185) Evans's school charity
is now in the hands of the Surrey County Council,
and is used to provide scholarships for Blechingley
boys and girls at Reigate Grammar School and
elsewhere.
Blechingley charities were unfortunate, for there
were once ten almshouses, 'built chiefly by the parish'
in 1668, and another added by the rector, the Rev.
Charles Hampton, who by his will, 1667, left also
land to provide firing for poor inhabitants. These
were condemned by the sanitary authority as unfit for
habitation and pulled down some time ago. There
are, however, four almshouses for widows built by the
late Miss C. M. Perkins, who died in 1870, the
inmates being endowed with 1s. 6d. a week.
There are church lands the rent of which, £18 15s.,
is applied to church purposes, and which are supposed
to have originated in a grant of land in 1407–8
made by a deed quoted by Manning and Bray. (fn. 186)
This land, called Parkgate land, formerly Green's,
was given for lights in the church. How they
escaped the confiscation of lands left for superstitious
usages under Edward VI does not appear. Mr.
Evans, the second founder of the school, gave land in
1633 to 'set the poor to work.' The proceeds are
now devoted to subsidizing allotment and cottage
gardening. There are also Hampton's and Masere's
charities for the poor, and Chapman's of £42 a year,
left by Isaac Chapman, who died in 1763, for the
parish clerk. Smith's charity is distributed as in other
Surrey parishes, chiefly in clothing, but is much more
valuable than is usually the case, amounting to £65 a
year. This is not because of any former importance of
Blechingley, but merely because it was charged upon
one of the most valuable of the estates belonging to
Smith's trustees.