The Worth—manor, or vill of Tor. Former proprietors, Brixi and Caschi: Norman owner, Builli; his vassal, Azo the presbyter: waste: old value 20s.; present 3s.

Mowbray and Moles.

My history of Torworth shall commence with a night scene at Serlby Mill.

"Know all men, present and to come, that I, Robert, son of Sibill de Moles, have given and granted, and by this my charter have quit-claimed, to Hugh de Moles and his heirs or assigns one acre of marsh in Lundesker, that is to say, that acre which my mother gave in perpetual homage and service: and that acre lies between Master Hugh and Agnes de Karleton: and one rood of land on the brechs between the aforesaid Hugh and Agnes, in consideration of a quarrel which we have had over a night's fishing at Serlebi Mill: to have and to hold of me, my heirs and assigns, unto the said Hugh and his heirs or assigns, freely, quietly, peaceably, and entirely in fee and inheritance for his fealty and service, &c. &c. Witnesses, Hugh of Harewood: Hingeram of Stirap: William of Kelishold: Gilfrid of Blith of Serlebi: Simon the miller of the same vill: Robert Gabi of Torworthe, and many others."

By a careful comparison of the deed from which I have taken this extract, and which, like other coeval documents, is without date, with charters of precisely the same character of handwriting, and the age of which, from other circumstances, can be well ascertained, I entertain little doubt that it was drawn up in the twelfth century.

Whether Robert de Moles had set up a counter claim to this particular piece of ground, and had been fishing upon it: or whether he and his party had come into violent collision with Master Hugh and his men, and had ill-treated them: or finally whether the dispute was simply as to whose property the night's take was—and the ground was ceded or presented as a peace-offering in consequence, it would be fruitless, as it is immaterial, to inquire. But the fishing scene at Serlby Mill introduces us at once to ancient and powerful names.

It may be observed that the earliest and best authenticated information bearing upon the ancient proprietors of the parish, with the exception of course of Domesday Survey, is to be derived from the Chartulary of our monastery, to which they were nearly all of them benefactors. I shall therefore here introduce such notices of the Family of Moles as the charters of the convent supply, and which embody matters of interest to which I shall subsequently advert. It will only be necessary to premise that this family received from Roger Mowbray in the twelfth century the grant of Serlby, with which Torworth was united.

"1. Be it known, &c. that I Hugh de Molis have given to the church and monks of S. Mary of Blyth in pure and perpetual alms five bovates of land and a half with all their appurtenances in Tordeord, that is to say, two bovates and a half which Osbert held, and one bovate which Reginald held, and one bovate which Robert held, and one bovate which my mother held in the same vill, with this condition, that the children of Henry de Bilbi shall hold the said land of the said monks by right of inheritance, paying to them one pound of pepper yearly at the fair of Blyth. And I wish it to be known that I have made this grant to Henry's children in payment of eight marks which I owed to them by the devise of their father.

"2. Know all men, &c. that I Hugh de Moles have given and quit-claimed to God and St. Mary of Blyth and the monks there serving God, Robert the son of Siward, who was my vassal and native: and that my heirs may not invalidate or revoke my grant I have confirmed this charter with my seal.*

"3. Know, &c. that I Hugh de Moles, through instinctive feelings of charity, have renounced and quit-claimed to the church of St. Mary of Blyth all claim which I had to the use of Ginet Magnus of Blyth, and Thomas Leman, and all his brothers and his sister, and all their offspring present and to come. This claim I quit-claimed in the presence of the justiciaries of our Lord the King of England, that is to say, Hubert Walter and others at Blyth, who were with him at that time when the King ordered them to collect the tenths throughout England.

"4. Know, &c. that I Matilda de Moles, in my widowhood and in my own liege power, have granted, &c. to Robert de Kelesalt, for his homage and service, the farm of those three acres of land which Roger Knodi holds of me in the fields of Torrcwrd; and all the service which out of those three acres he owed to me or my heirs, without any drawback—he paying me yearly at Pentecost one penny for all services, customs, and demands."

From the first of these documents we see that the convent acted in the capacity of trustees to the children of Henry de Bilbi. Hugh Moles had borrowed money of him: and he gives certain lands to the convent in trust for the benefit of his family.

The second charter shows us that this land of freedom once contained slaves. Robert, the son of Siward, had been born a slave, being in the same condition with his father. He was a nativus, and belonged to his master, and by him might be disposed of like any other of his goods and chattels. This born slave was handed over by Moles to the convent of Blyth, like those mentioned in the following charter, and by the prior and monks employed in menial services.

In the next document we obtain a glimpse of the chivalrous days of Richard I., and are enabled to fix the precise year, namely 1193, when the transaction took place. In this year the lion-hearted king, on his return from Palestine, was taken prisoner at Vienna by Leopold Duke of Austria, and handed over to Henry VI. the emperor of Germany, who kept him in close confinement. Now the imprisonment of the superior lord was one of those cases in which the aid of his vassals could be demanded. The emperor consented to release the captive sovereign for the ransom of 150,000 marks; and to raise this enormous amount of money, twenty shillings were levied on each knight's fee in England; the wealthy churches and monasteries melted down their plate to the amount of 30,000 marks; the bishops, abbots, and nobles paid one-fourth part of their yearly rents, and the clergy contributed one-tenth of their tithes. The full amount being collected, Queen Eleanor, attended by the great functionary Walter, Archbishop of Rouen, and chief Justitiary of England,† mentioned in the charter, set out for Germany and set the King at liberty.

It was upon this great stirring national emergency, therefore, that Hugh do Moles appeared before the justitiary at Blyth and made the surrender above described. But why did he select this particular occasion for so doing? I have a strong suspicion that he received from the convent at Blyth an equivalent in money for the so-called gift and concession which he had made to them, and that he was therewith enabled to satisfy the demand made upon his property by way of contribution to the ransom of his sovereign. He appears to have been a needy man, and at the same time able and ready-witted; for we have seen him turning the misunderstanding about the fishing at Serlby Mill to good account; we have seen him in debt and obliged to mortgage (so to speak) some portion of his Torworth estate; and now upon a great public occasion he hands over some of his vassals to the prior of Blyth—not, I think, without a consideration.

The contemplation of the ancient history and condition of our country, national and social, is ever attended with peculiar attraction and interest; and the elucidation of ancient men and manners is no where better and more vividly presented than in instruments such as those which we have now before us: and for this reason that it is given, not professedly, but incidentally only, and

Let me now pursue my history.

In the somewhat vague and unsatisfactory language of Thoroton (iii. 429), "Roger de Mowbray gave the manor of Serleby in the time of king John, or before, to Matilda de Moles," a lady who will presently come under our notice again.

Now we know that after the rebellion of Robert de Belesme, Earl of Shrewsbury, who had . received from Rufus the possessions of his kinsman Roger de Builli, the great Norman lord of this part of the country, Henry I. resumed those possessions into his own hands. He did not long retain them, for Nigel de Albini, who in 1118 married Gundred de Gournay, the great-granddaughter of the Conquerer, and is recorded to have been possessed of one hundred and forty knight's fees in England, received, probably, a portion of de Builli's estates in Nottinghamshire, inasmuch as we find his son Roger conferring upon the family of de Moles the manor of Serlby (formerly the fee of de Builli), with which that of Torworth also has been coupled from the earliest period. Thus, in the 10th John, a charter is recited by which Matilda de Moles gives to the Abbot and Convent of Roche all the lands which the men of Blyth held of Hugh her brother, and afterwards of herself, in the fields of Serlby and Torworth. And the jury who were summoned for the purpose of investigating titles and redressing grievances in the 29th Edward I. pronounced that Hugh de Serlby, who was descended from Matilda above-named, held the manor of Serlby with Torworth by military service from Roger Mowbray, then dead.

The house of Mowbray was one of those mighty satellites which revolved around the throne with a power and a brilliancy but little inferior to those of the great central source of might and honour—the sovereign himself—now intermarrying with the blood-royal of England—now founding splendid religious houses—now standing in the vanguard of battle in defence of their sovereign—now bearding their sovereign to the face in open rebellion—Earls of Arundel—Earls of Nottingham —Earls Marshal—Dukes of Norfolk. They sprang by the female side from Amicia de Mowbray, who married Roger de Albini, and was sister of Robert de Mowbray, Earl of Northumberland, who rebelled against Eufus, and died in Windsor Castle after an imprisonment of thirty years. The son of Eoger and Amicia, Nigel de Albini—the bow-bearer of Rufus—married, as I have stated above, Gundred de Gournay, the great-granddaughter of the Conqueror, (being the granddaughter of William Earl of Warren and Surrey, Lord of Conisborough Castle, and Gundred his wife, the daughter of the Conqueror,) and from that marriage sprang Eoger, who by command of Henry I. took the name and arms of Mowbray. This mighty man espoused the side of Stephen in his contest with the Empress Maud, and, in conjunction with those powerful Barons of Yorkshire, William Albemarle, Walter Espec, Ilbert Laci, William Percy and others, and William Peverel and Geoffrey Halsaline of Nottinghamshire, fought at the battle of the Standard, near Northallerton, in 1138, against David, King of Scotland. Subsequently he was taken prisoner, with his sovereign, Stephen, at the battle of Lincoln.

In the cessation of strife between Stephen and Matilda, which England enjoyed in 1148, Mowbray, Warren his relative, and others, finding no opportunity for the exercise of their military prowess at home, joined the Crusade under the Emperor Conrade and Louis VII. King of France, in which the flower of the English and French nobility fell, and 200,000 men were killed. Mowbray was manifestly a man of deep religious enthusiasm. To the Order of Knights Templars he was so munificent a benefactor, that they are said to have conferred upon him the distinguished honour of pardoning any brother who had transgressed the rules of their body, provided he appeared before their benefactor and confessed his offence. But he was in fact a most munificent patron of the Church at large, being the founder of the Monastery of the Cistercians at Byland, near Helmsley, of the Priory of Black Canons at Newborough in the same locality, and of the Preceptory of Knights Templars at Balsall, in Warwickshire. His possessions at Slingsby, Gilling East, Thirsk, and in the Isle of Axholme, were very large. In the revolt of the sons of Henry II. against their father Mowbray took arms against his sovereign, and commenced his treasonable operations at Thirsk castle. The King, however, as we know from history, proved master, and nothing was left for Mowbray, Ferrers, Bigod, and others, but to surrender their fortresses and throw themselves on the clemency of their sovereign.

If the statement be correct that Roger Mowbray made a second expedition to the Holy Land, this second expedition was made in 1188. Saladin had mounted the throne of Egypt, had vanquished the Christians of Palestine, and obtained possession of Jerusalem. These disastrous tidings spread dismay throughout Western Christendom. Pope Gregory VIII., Henry II. of England, Philip of France, and the Emperor Frederic I. entered into a confederacy to rescue the Holy City, and to relieve the Christians in the East. No effort, no argument was spared which could rouse the indignation or inflame the ambition of young and old. And although Mowbray was then in all probability on the verge of seventy, he again assumed the cross. There is some discrepancy in the accounts of the termination of this great man's career. Some say that he died in the East, and was interred at Sures. Others that he was taken prisoner, but being redeemed by the Knights Templars, returned home, died in advanced years, at the very close probably of the twelfth, if not in the thirteenth century, and was buried in Byland Abbey, near the Lady Gundred his mother, after having lived and played a most prominent part in eventful times, and leaving behind him a name and a renown which the civil and ecclesiastical annals of England will never permit to perish.

At the risk of incurring the charge of a want of gallantry towards Matilda de Moles, to whom, however, I shall very shortly return, I cannot resist the temptation of pursuing the history of this powerful family, though in a very summary manner, into succeeding generations—more especially as we shall find their name in course of time linked with that of our own shire.

Roger Mowbray then married Alice de Gaunt, who was very probably the daughter or sister of that Gilbert do Gaunt, in his wife's right Earl of Lincoln, who founded the Cistercian abbey of Rufford in 1148. They had two sons, Nigel and Robert, the elder of whom espoused Mabel, daughter of the Earl of Clare, and had four sons, William, Philip, Robert, and Roger. William was the ancestor of the Mowbrays and Howards, both in succession Dukes of Norfolk. Philip married Galiena, the daughter of the Earl of Dunbar, and with her received the baronies of Barnbougle and Dalmeny, in the county of Linlithgow, and Inverkeithing in Fifeshire; and was the ancestor of a long and eminent line of men.

I return to William Mowbray. From him descended John Lord Mowbray, named in the Table below given, which will assist the reader, it is hoped, in forming clear conceptions regarding the progressive history and descent of the House of Mowbray.

Mowbray pedigree

The issue of this marriage of Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, with Elizabeth the daughter of the Earl of Arundel, was—1. Thomas Mowbray, Earl Marshal and Earl of Nottingham (though not, it is said, Duke of Norfolk), who joining with Scrope, Archbishop of York, in rebellion against Henry IV. was beheaded with that prelate at York in 1405. From him descended in succession three generations of John Lord Mowbray, Earl of Nottingham, and Duke of Norfolk, the last of the three having also received from Henry VI. the revived title of Earl of Warren and Surrey, which his ancestors had enjoyed in bygone ages. 2. Margaret, who married Sir Robert Howard, Knight (who sprang from the Howards of Wigenhall, in Norfolk), and whose only son Sir John Howard adhered to the House of York; distinguished himself in the French wars of Henry VI; was by Edward IV. made in 1461 constable of the castle of Norwich; in 1470 was summoned to Parliament as Lord Howard, and made Captain-General of the Fleet for resisting the Lancastrians; and finally, 28 June, 1483, was by Richard III. created Earl Marshal of England and Duke of Norfolk, and his son Thomas, Earl of Surrey. Subsequently he was constituted Lord Admiral, and received very large grants of lands in the counties of Suffolk, Kent, Cornwall, Cambridge, Somerset, and Wilts. He fell by the side of Richard III. at Bosworth; the well-known distich having the night before the battle been affixed to his tent:

Jockey of Norfolk, be not too bold,
For Dickon thy master is bought and sold.

3. Isabel, who married James Lord Berkeley.

My limits will not permit me to follow the fortunes of the illustrious lineage of Mowbray and Howard beyond this point. Suffice it for me to invite the attention of my readers to these general statements. 1. The first Duke of Norfolk was a Mowbray. 2. The present noble houses of Norfolk, Carlisle, and Effingham are all descended through the female side from Margaret Mowbray. 3. Three of the four quarterings of the Norfolk arms are three lions with label for Plantagenet, cheeky for Warren, lion rampant for Mowbray—insignia which likewise enter into the Carlisle shield.

Descent of the Manor of Serlby with Torworth through the Families of Moles and Serlby to those of Saunderson and Monckton.

I return to the family of de Moles. A lady of this name, Matilda de Moles, is stated by Thoroton to have received the lordship of Serlby with Torworth from Roger Mowbray, in the time of John or before. It was certainly before, as the charters above recited abundantly testify. In what precise relation she stood to Sibilla and her son Robert, mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, I am not able to state. I think it however probable that she was the lady to whom the instrument (4) refers; that she was the mother of Hugh, who has already appeared before us, and of Matilda; that Hugh died without issue, and that his sister succeeded him and married Hugh de Serleby. Both families, that of Moles and that of Serlby, had, we may conjecture, been settled for some time on the spot, possibly as tenants under some immediate sub-infeudatory of the lord paramount, who had passed away, and the former had ingratiated themselves with the house of Mowbray, and from them received a grant of the manor.

Be this as it may, from the marriage of Matilda de Moles with Hugh of Serlby sprang no less than twelve heirs male, who became in twelve successive generations lords of the manor of Serlby with Torworth. They possessed the property for five centuries. They enjoyed a chapel of their own at Serlby, and although they have left no historic name or achievements behind them, the great and substantial distinctions—the nobilitas sola atque unica—of virtue were theirs, for without them they could not have endured through such a lengthened period of time.

One connection of distinction at least the family formed. Ankareta Serlby, about the time of Edward IV., married Thomas Chaworth, a member of the Annesley and Wiverton family of Chaworth, from whom descended Lord Chaworth.

The family of Serlby not only however held Serlby of the Mowbrays, but Harthill also, in Yorkshire, of the Bardolfs, who claimed kindred blood with the Mowbrays, being descended from Reginald de Warren, the second son of William de Warren, Earl of Surrey, and Gundred, daughter of the Conqueror; and it was probably this connection between these two great houses which obtained for them the latter manor. They had a mansion at Harthill, which stood where the present hall now stands, on the north side of the churchyard.

Anthony Serlby, who died at Harthill October 13, 1588, left both Harthill and Serlby for life and twenty-one years after to his wife Gertrude, whose grandfather John Leake of Hasland was the brother of Elizabeth the wife of John Hardwick of Hardwick, the parents of Elizabeth the celebrated Countess of Shrewsbury.

Gertrude Serlby, the widow, married Sir George Chaworth, who succeeded to the property of the Serlbys at Harthill and resided there. Another Sir George Chaworth was made Viscount Chaworth of Armagh. To him Harthill appears to have come on the death of Gertrude Lady Chaworth, about 1623; and it was sold in 1674 by Grace Viscountess Chaworth, daughter of John Duke of Rutland, and relict of Patrick the last Lord Chaworth, to Thomas Earl of Danby, who was afterwards created Marquis of Caermarthen and Duke of Leeds. Juliana, daughter and heir of the last Lord Chaworth, married Chambre Brabazon, Earl of Meath, in which family the title of Lord Chaworth is now vested.

With respect to the fate of Serlby and Torworth I have not so brilliant a story to tell. It is quite clear that the Serlbys had gradually descended in the social scale since the death of Anthony Serlby, if not before, like many another ancient and good family in the kingdom at large, and even in this shire and locality. The consequence was, that in 1627 Thomas Serlby, who describes himself as of Pule-hill, in the parish of Silkston, and who was probably cousin or half-cousin of Anthony Serlby, sold Serlby with Torworth to William Saunderson of Blyth, the elder brother of Bishop Saunderson, the pedigree of whose family has already been given.

The deed of sale bears date April 3, 1627, and conveys "all the manors of Serlby, Torworth, and Farworth, the capital messuage called Serlby Hall, two water-mills, together with all manorial rights and privileges in Serlby, Torworth, Farworth, Wiseton, Mattersay, Scrooby, Styrrup, Olcotes, Nornay, and Harworth, and all lands and rents in the same or elsewhere in the county of Nottingham." The purchase money was 860l.

And now another decayed family comes upon the stage. The Mortons were "an ancient and worshipful family" settled at Martin and Bawtry. They are traceable up to the middle of the thirteenth century, or even higher still. One of them, Robert, was escheator for the county of Nottingham, and knight of the shire from 1361 to 1393, and gave 250l., a very large sum in those days, to the prior and convent of Nostel, on condition that they should pay an annual pension of eight marks to the chaplain of the hospital of St. Mary Magdalene, near Bawtry. At the Reformation they adhered to the old faith, and one of them is said to have been sent from Rome to promulgate the papal bull excommunicating Queen Elizabeth.

About 1612 Anthony Morton of Martin, the father, and George and Robert his sons, had granted leases for fifteen years to Nicholas Saunderson, Viscount Castleton; for sixty years to Simon Dobson and Thomas Coulson; and for two hundred years to John Clifton.

On Jan. 8, 1627-8, Robert Morton, his father and brother being dead, sells for 440l. to William Saunderson of Blyth abovenamed, and Robert Saunderson his son and heir, the manor and lordship of Harworth, comprising those farms in the occupation of John Wagstaffe, Samuel Tomson, and Humfrey Glover, and all the usual appurtenances of a manor; the Saundersons stipulating within three months after the surrender or cancelling of Clifton's lease to pay to Morton 200l. "at or in the south porch of the parish church of Blyth;" and as long as they keep it unpaid to pay in the porch of Harworth Church 11l. at the feasts of Pentecost and St. Martin.

The deed of transfer was executed at East Retford January 11th, 1628, before Sir Gervase Clifton, Bart., and Francis Thornhagh, Esq., two of his majesty's justices of the peace. Although Harworth does not fall within the limits of my history, I have deemed it not irrelevant to mention this conveyance of the manor from the Mortons to the Saundersons, inasmuch as from this date it has come down incorporated with the manors of Serlby and Torworth under one proprietor.

But William Saunderson appears at best to have been nothing more than a mere speculator, and to have lived by expedients. No sooner hardly does he obtain possession than he mortgages to Robert Mellish, who had married his daughter Mary, the manors and lands of Serlby, Torworth, and Farworth. The mortgage was executed on the 8th August, 1627. There is little doubt that Mellish advanced the purchase money, and took a mortgage of the property.

In 1635 Robert Mellish enfeoffs these three estates, not to William Saunderson however, but to his son Robert, and his son's wife, and to his grandson Robert. Now it was in this very year that old Saunderson sold Blyth to John Mellish, the brother of Robert above named, so that there is apparent foundation for the statement put upon record by the Mellishes in the last century that William Saunderson "purchased Serlby of Robert Mellish with the money which he had received from John Mellish," in other words, that the sale of Blyth enabled him to pay off the mortgage upon Serlby.

To complete the story of William Saunderson's pecuniary transactions, I may state that in 1642, August 9th (being then described as "of Styrrup"), he mortgaged to William Mellish of Stepney, the brother of John and Robert, the manor of Harworth; but in 1653 the estates are declared unincumbered, and on the 23rd June of that year Saunderson (then "of Serlby") and Robert his grandson appoint Edward Stanhope of Grimston, Charles Hall of Kettlethorpe, Edward Gill of Carr House, and Reason Mellish of Ragnall, Esqrs., and Robert Thorpe of Clayworth, Gent., trustees to execute the provisions of settlement of a marriage shortly to take place between Robert Saunderson and Mary daughter of Very Rev. Anthony Topham, D.D., Dean of Lincoln and Rector of Clayworth. The provisions of the trust are—that the manors of Serlby, Torworth, Farworth, and Harworth (with the exception of four specified farms), are settled on Robert and his wife for their joint lives, and for that of the survivor; then in tail male; and, failing male issue, on the daughters (if any); but that if Robert marries again, and has issue male, fortunes shall be given to the daughters of the first wife as follows, viz.: 1,000l. if only one; 600l. each, if two; if more, then 1,500l. to be equally divided among them; and, failing all male issue, the estates shall go to the daughters in equal portions. William Saunderson reserves a portion of Harworth (that is probably the four farms just referred to) for himself during his own life.

The issue of this marriage were Robert, Anthony, and Mary. The sons left no children behind them. Mary Saunderson therefore eventually succeeded to the Serlby estates.

She died a spinster; but she has left behind her a name which, together with that of one of her faithful servants, is embalmed in the grateful memory of the poor of Harworth, Styrrup, and Serlby. That domestic is Robert Brailsford her cook, who died in 1701, and was buried at Harworth, having invested his little property, the fruit of his faithful service and praiseworthy economy, in the purchase of an estate at Sykehouse in the parish of Fishlake, which, together with a school and schoolmaster's house at Harworth, he left in the hands of trustees, for the education and clothing of the poor in the above townships. In order doubtless to strengthen this benevolent and thoughtful man's pious benefaction, Mrs. Mary Saunderson, his mistress, left by will a rent-charge of 20l. to issue out of the Serlby estate, and to be applied in furtherance of the same objects. Since their days the trust has been faithfully executed by gentlemen and clergymen of the neighbourhood, who have acted as trustees; and who may enumerate the advantages which the bounty of Mary Saunderson and Robert Brailsford has conferred upon the poor during the last five generations, or which may accrue to them for generations yet to come? Verily, for such ancestors as these the beautiful aspiration of the poet is surely permissible:

Di majorum umbris tenuem et sine pondere terram
Spirantesque crocos et in urna perpetuum ver
Qui præceptorem sancti voluere parentis
Esse loco!

Excellent person, however, as I believe Mary Saunderson to have been, she, like other preceding members of her family, was in pecuniary difficulties. In the last five years of her life she mortgaged her property deeply. In her last will and testament, dated January 20th, 1723, she appoints William Thornton of Bloxham, Benjamin Wilcock of the Middle Temple, Mary Vincent of Doncaster spinster, and Elizabeth Stowe, late of Serlby, then of Barlborough, her executors; and Isabella the wife of the Rev. Joseph Crompton, Eector of Normanton upon Soar, Anne the wife of Henry Dunston of Worksop, Margaret Vincent, and Catharine Vincent, all daughters of Thomas Vincent, late of Barnborough Grange, then of Worksop, her residuary legatees. She bequeaths her property, personal and real, to the said Thomas Vincent, whom she calls her cousin, for his life, and after his death to his four daughters in equal portions. She died December 8th, 1724, in the sixty-seventh year of her age, and was buried at Harworth on the 11th of the same month.

In 1725, June 24, her executors and the other parties interested convey to John Monckton, Esq. of Hodroyd, the manors or lordships of Serlby alias Serlaby, Torworth, Farworth, and Harworth; as well as all the Saunderson property in Blyth, Ranskill, Mattersea, Wiseton, Styrrup, Olcotes, Nornay, and Scrooby, containing in all eight hundred and forty-six acres sixteen perches, together with "the yearly chief rents belonging to the said manor of Torworth, amounting to 17s. 7d. yearly: and the chief rents of the manor of Harworth, 6s. 8d. yearly: chief rents of Torworth, 4s. 8d. yearly: and the yearly rent of 4s. payable for Bawtry Hospital: and all other the chief rents, services, moors, commons, wastes, and waste grounds, courts leet, courts-baron, perquisites, and profits of courts and leets, waifes, estrays, goods, waived goods, and chattels of felons and fugitives and felons of themselves, deodands, herriots, reliefs, escheats, &c. unto the said manors and lands belonging."

Thomas Vincent above named was, I may remark in passing, descended from the Vincents of Braithwell and Barnborough Grange, one of whom, John Vincent, was agent to the Duke of York, and fell with his master at the battle of Wakefield in 1460. He married Isabel, daughter of Philip Packer of Groombridge, in Kent, Esq. and died in 1726, aged 76, and was buried at Barnborough, leaving behind him three sons and eight daughters, of whom Isabella, Anne, Margaret, and Catharine above mentioned were four. Isabella married Eev. Joseph Crompton, Rector of Normanton-upon-Soar; Anne, Henry Dunston of Worksop, Esq.; Margaret, in 1735, Robert Earl of Carnwath; and Catharine, George Nevill of Thorney, Esq.

* The name Hugh—Hugo—is accidentally omitted in the original; but the charter is headed " Carta Hugonis de Moles."
† In the reign of Richard I. Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, styled by Spelman Hubert Walter, was also Justitiary of England. It is somewhat difficult to discriminate between the two; but I believe the Archbishop of Rouen is the person mentioned in our charter.