Hide
A History of the Family of Sandford of Sandford, Askham, Howgill and Helton in the County of Westmorland
hide
Hide
FROM THE YEAR 1174 TO THE PRESENT DAY.
By William Arthur Cecil Sandford
Part 3
12
Three years afterwards (1314) occurred the battle of Bannockburn, and the victorious Scots, pouring south under Sir Edward Bruce and Sir James Douglas, sacked and burnt Appleby. The greater part of Westmorland was laid waste, and from a deed which will be quoted later it appears that Robert de Sandford was a heavy sufferer. But before this the two counties of Cumberland and Westmorland had suffered so terribly at the hands of the Scots, that they alone, out of all England north of the Trent, were excused from sending men to Edward II's host which suffered such a decisive defeat by Robert Bruce in 1314. It is pretty certain therefore, that Robert de Sandford was not present at Bannockburn. In 1313 he was appointed joint deputy sheriff of Westmorland, an office which he continued to hold till 1326.(a)
In 10 Edward II (1316/17) Robert de Sandford was chosen as Knight of the Shire of Westmorland, and thus started on a long parliamentary career, representing the county almost continuously from this date to 1344, in 16 parliaments. (b) In the parliamentary writs of the period are some interesting entries showing expenses allowed him for his attendance at Westminster from 13 to 19 Edward II. The scale varies from 2/6 to 3/4 per day, and he is allowed expenses for 14 days travelling - © 7 coming up to London and 7 returning to Westmorland, so that in those days it took as long to get from Westmorland to London as it now takes to get from London to New York,. In modern money the allowance at the higher scale equalled about £4 a day, or at the rate of about £1500 a year, but it was only paid during his actual attendance at parliament and his journey there and back. Travelling in those days was not a simple matter. Roads were practically non-existent (except the great Roman roads and near a Cistercian Abbey) and inns were poor and few. The baggage taken with them by travellers of position was considerable, including as it did their bedding and provisions, and as wheeled vehicles were unknown all this was carried by pack. The expense of such a journey
(a) C. & W. Trans. (O.S.) IV, 285 et seq.
(b) Rolls of Parliament.
© "Parliamentary Writs" (1831). II. (ii)
13
must have been great, and it cannot be said that the allowance was excessive.
As Knight of the Shire of Westmorland Robert de Sandford took part in some historic Parliaments. The glory of Edward I's reign had departed, and the Scots under King Robert the Bruce had not only shaken off the English yoke but were laying waste the Northern counties.
The defeat of Bannockburn was followed in 1319 by that of Mylton-in-Swale, and under the Earl of Lancaster the Barons rose against the King. In 1322 Edward met them at Boroughbridge in Yorkshire and inflicted a heavy defeat on them, Lancaster paying on the scaffold the penalty of his rebellion. Parliament at once met at York, revoked the Ordinances passed in 1311, and reestablished the authority of the King, Lords, and Commons. But the incapacity of the King was all too evident. On 18th November, 1325, he laid his grievances before Parliament (the expences allowed Robert de Sandford for attending this Parliament were 3/- a day) (a) and for a time the end was staved off, but on 7th January 1327 took place one of the most dramatic and significant episodes in the long story of Parliament, when for the first time in history a King of England was solemnly arraigned before the representatives of his subjects, declared unfit to govern, and deposed from the throne they considered him unworthy to fill. A few weeks later with the tragedy of Berkeley Castle ended the life of this the unhappiest of the Plantagenets.
The immediate effect of those happenings on Robert de Sandford's personal affairs is interesting. In 1324 he had obtained from the Crown the "keeping" of lands in Thibay (Tobay) and Ronnerthwayt (Roundthwaite) in Co. Westmorland, for seven years at a rent of 50/- per annum. (b) With the deposition of Edward II, however, intrigues started all over England to have concessions originally granted by the late King transferred to new beneficiaries, and in 1327 the same lands were granted by the new government to Adam de Redeman on the same terms, in spite of the fact that the term for which they had boon granted to Robert de Sandford still had four years to run. In the grant to Adam de Redeman the lands are distinctly described. as "lately held by Robert de Sandford from the late King", so there was no question of trying to hide the
matter. ©
(a) Parliamentary Writs (1831);II, (ii)
(b) Fine Rolls, 17 ;Ed. II.
© ibid., 1 E.III (memb. II)
14
However, Robert de Sandford did not take the injustice lying down. He promptly petitioned Parliament, and his petition can still be read in the Rolls of Parliament. It is given in the original Norman-French in Appendix .In it he states that he "took of our Sovereign Lord the King who is dead" a small holding in Tybay and Roundthwaite for seven years, which holding had been "completely destroyed and burnt by the Scots." And that on the holding he had built 12 houses for tenants and erected a mill. And in view of the new grant to Adam de Redman he had been robbed of four years of his term of occupation and put to heavy loss. It was decided that Robert should remain in possession for the full term of his original grant. (a)
This incident is a small one, but it shows how those who were not too scrupulous tried to turn the deposition of Edward II to their own advantage. Incidentally, Robert's petition shows that Sandford and the surrounding district had boon heavily ravaged by the Scots 12 or 13 years after Bannockburn.
In 1328 he brought an action against William Todd of Appleby and Margaret his wife that they should hold to their covenant with him concerning one messuage and two bovates of land in Sandford: as a result of which the Sheriff was ordered to distrain them by all lands. Robert's attorney for this action was William de Sandford, - probably either his brother William the cleric or his nephew William, also a cleric. *
In 1331 he again hold the office of Deputy sheriff of Westmorland (b) and three years later two of his sons, Thomas and William, were returned to Parliament as members for Appleby, while their father again represented the County of Westmorland; © so the Parliament of l334 saw no less than three members of the Sandford family sitting in it, this family distinction being repeated in 1340 and l346.
In 1332 Robert de Sandford sat in the first Parliament where the Barons and Bishops sat in a separate chamber from the Knights of the Shire and the Burgesses - an incident of great historical importance. From this date the Lords and Commons were quite separate, and the Constitution took the form that it keeps today
* De Banco Roll, 2 E.III, Easter, 273; & Mich., 275.
(a) Rolls of Parliament, II, 412.
(b) C. & W. Trans., (O.S.), IV, 285 et seq,.
(d) Parliamentary Writs.
15
In 1335 Robert de Sandford took part in one of the numerous personal feuds of the period, for in that year is a Commission of Oyer and Terminer to Richard de Wylughby and others on a complaint by Sir Henry Fits Hugh, kt that he had impounded certain cattle for trespass on his lands at Mikelton in Teasdale, Co. York, and Robert de Clifford, Kt., with Robert de Sandford and eleven others (including such well known Westmorland names as Strickland, Layburn, Warcop, Musgrave and Brampton) broke down the pound, rescued the cattle, hunted in his lands and assaulted his man and servants. (a) The raiding party included three knights (Sir Robert de Clifford, Sir Thomas de Strikland and Sir Alexander de Wyndesore) a knight of the Shire and late deputy sheriff (Robert de Sandford), and a parson ("Master" William de Brampton, parson of Betham) and the whole incident is a good illustration of the lawlessness of the time. It was evidently in revenge for a considered injustice to Sir Robert de Clifford, for five days later the King appointed a commission to enquire into the complaint of Sir Henry Fits Hugh that he having recovered seison against Sir Robert de Clifford of 3000 acres of Moor and pasture in Mikleton in Teesdale, having come with the Sheriff of York and 12 Knights and freemen of the county to take Inquisition of the land and make execution of the King's writ, there came Robert de Clifford and others with an armed force no that they dare not execute the writ, "Contrary to the Statute of Northampton'. There is little doubt that Robert de Sandford was one of the party which accompanied Clifford.
Despite the heavy defeat of the Scots at Halidon Hill in 1333, Cumberland and Westmorland were still being ravaged and laid waste, for in 1337 the Bishop of Carlisle reported that he could not get the tenths as the clergy had all fled. (b) Without going so far as Taylor, the (17th century) water poet, in his statement that
"whoso then did in the Borders dwell
Lived little happier than those in hell"
(a) Pat. Rolls. 9 Ed.III (memb. 14 d.)
(b) N. & B., I.
16
one can imagine that between the ravages of the Scots on the one hand and the lawlessness of the landowners on the other, life in the border counties in the fourteenth century was far from pleasant. Sandford, however, was just too far south to get the full effect of all the Scottish raids. Penrith, owing to the claim of the Scottish King to that manor, was the heaviest sufferer, and comparatively few raiding parties seem to have come much further south than Appleby, then a large and flourishing town. Its collapse came in 1388 when in revenge for Otterbourne, the Scots laid nine tenths of it in ruins and slaughtered all the inhabitants, a calamity from which it never recovered. (a) Of course, the damage was not all on one side: raiding parties from Cumberland and Westmorland ravaged the south-west counties of Scotland from time to time and the border
"forreys" with their savagery and cruelty were already a part of the life of the people on both sides of the marches.
In 1337 started the Hundred Years war with France, and to raise stores and money for this Edward III had recourse to various impositions. Amongst others, wool - the staple product of the country - was impounded for the King's use by officers appointed in each county. The chief officer for this duty in Westmorland was Robert de Sandford, and in 1340 we find a promise by the King to pay John le Tailour of Brough 6 marks 6 shillings and 8 pence (£4.6.8.) for 34 stones of wool taken by Robert de Sandford and his fellows, appointed to take for the King's use a moiety of the wool in the county of Westmorland. (b) It will be noticed that this is merely a promise to pay a not a payment. It is doubtful if the majority of the promises of this nature made by Edward III were ever redeemed. The long French wars, following the trouble of the previous reign, drained the exchequer of the last groat, and Edward III's reign is one long story of taxation and debt.
In 1349 died a certain Gilbert do Kervere, and in his will dated 16th April of that year, proved in the Court of Hustlings, he leaves his kinsman Robert de Sandford and his (Robert's) nephew the house in London
(a)
(b) Pat. Rolls; 14 Ed.III (Memb. 13)
17
he lives in with the shops pertaining thereto, for their lives with remainder to the church of St. Alphage, (in Cripplegate). Who this Gilbert de Kervere was or how he was related to the Sandford family I have been unable to discover. William de Sandford, nephew of Robert, will be dealt with later.
Robert was now getting on in years, and evidently felt his end approaching, for in September 1354 he and Agnes his wife obtained from Pope Innocent VI an Indulgence to choose a confessor to give plenary remission of sins at the hour of death, (a) a -privilege also granted to his son Thomas by the same pontiff in April of the following year. (b)
Robert de Sandford was still living in 1356 (30 Edward III) when he is returned in the feodary of the Cliffords as holding the manor of Sandford, but seems to have died either late in that year or early the following year, as his name no longer appears, and that of his son Thomas takes its place. It is possible that he was knighted as at 29 July, 1316, "Sir Robert de Sandford, Kt." is mentioned as a knight perambulating the forests of Westmorland, (X)
Robert de Sandford was the most prominent man the family had yet produced, and his local power and influence were evidently considerable. He seems to have been a man of considerable means, and we find him adding to his lands all through his life. In 1321 he acquired of John de Hauberger and Margaret his wife lands in Sandford to hold of the chief lords: © in 1323 he and Agnes his wife acquired still more lands from William de Newby to be held by them and the heirs of Agnes, (d) and in 1345 he and his son Thomas de Sandford acquired 2/3rd of a messuage etc., in Crosby Gerrard to be held by himself and Thomas and the heirs of Thomas of the chief lords. (e) In 1332 he is returned in a Lay Subsidy Roll as having £ll worth of personal goods in Sandford. We know from the licence to his son Henry (referred to below) that he had a private chapel at his manor house of Sandford, and that mass was said there daily for the household, As to the identity of his wife Agnes we have no trace; she evidently survived him, as she was living in the year of his death. (See the Indulgence from Innocent VI referred to above,) His four sons will be dealt with later.
(a) Cal Papa1 Letters; III 525.
(b) ibid.
(X) "Kts, of Edw.I" ; Harl. Socy. 1931)
© C. & W. Trans. (N.S) XXI, 230.
(d) ibid.
(e) F. of F. 19. Ed.III.
18
Robert de Sandford appears to have had a number of brothers. Of these we have already mentioned John, who was granted land at Soulby by his father in 1310. This John de Sandford had a son also called John, who on Sunday after the feast of St. Laurence in 1339 released part of this land to Richard de Musgrave. (a) The Sandford holdings in Soulby were evidently considerable, for in the same year (1339) Richard de Musgrave impleads John son of William, Knight, and Johna his wife for feehold in Soulby of 2000 acres of moor which they say John de Sandford holds and held when they applied for the writ. The Jury decided that John de Sandford was not a tenant at that time. (b) Later on, in 1347, we find John rector of Crogelyn and Hugh de Ormeshead confirming to Richard de Musgrave, a cleric, a portion of land in Soulby called Sandforth landes. © This has a bearing on the disputed claim to Soulby between the Musgrave and Sandford families referred to above.
Another brother appears to have been a Simon de Sandford, who represented Appleby in Parliament in 2 and 6 Edward III (1328 and 1332);(his expenses and those of his co-member John de Haveryngton came to VII. Li., XIIS & XVIII d., for attending the 1328 Parliament.) (d) On 8th February 1336 he received a Commission from the King at Knaresborough. (e) He was evidently in holy orders, for in 6 Edward II (1332) he was presented to the church of Musgrave, being described as "King's Clerk" (f). He had been presented in the previous year, but the appointment was cancelled as it was found that the original incumbent was still living, the report of his death being false. (g) He had custody of the hospital of Rotherford, near Roxburgh in Scotland, granted him by Edward Baliol, King of Scotland this being confirmed to him by King Edward III on 26 July 1335. He was dead by 31 Oct. 1337, when the custody of the same hospital was granted to William de Embledon, "Simon de Sandford being dead". (x)
An Adam de Sandford living about the same time, possibly another brother or nephew of Robert's, received a grant of land in Carlisle and Corbridge in 1350, (h) but this is the only trace we have of him.
Another Simon de Sandford represented Appleby in Parliament in 1346.
(a) MSS. At Lowther Cas.; S. & W. Trans. (N.S) XXI, 230.
(b) Ibid.
© Ibid.
(d) Rolls of Parliament, II 441 (Rot claus. 2 E. III; m.d. desso)
(e) Chanc. Inquis. (Misc. 16 E.III; file 130 (25)
(f) Pat Rolls, 6 E. III (memb. 2)
(g) Ibid.
(h) R. P. Craster's "Hist. Of Northumberland X. 439.
19
Yet another brother of Robert's was Wi11iam de Sandford. We have many records concerning individuals of this name about this time, but they cannot all refer to the same person, and it is almost impossible to say for certain what was the exact relationship of these various William de Sandfords. All we know is that they were members of the same family, and though we can
settle with a fair degree of certainty that an individual of a certain name hold a certain place in the family, we cannot say that each reference refers to that individual or to another of the same name. The custom of mentioning the father's name had died out, and the difficulties of "placing" an individual therefore become almost insuperable where the descent of lands is not in question.
This William de Sandford received a title for holy orders of 5 marks from his brother Robert in 1324 (a) and in 1327 we find him (described as "chaplain") bringing an action against Robert de Wo1seley concerning the detention of cattle. (b) The next year we find another action against the same Robert de Wolseley for trespass at Sandford brought by William son of William de Sandford. © This may have been a son of the last William born before his father took orders, or possibly a natural son. He is not described as "clericus" in the action. Possibly he was the nephew William of Robert de Sandford named in Gilbert de Kervere's will in l349.
One of these Wi1liam de Sandfords acted as interim feofee between William de Whale and Hugh III de Lowther and Margaret his wife in a final concord settling the Manor of Whale on the said Hugh and Margaret (a) This is evidently the same William de Sandford who on 6 Nov. 1348 obtained a grant of the Wardenship of the Chapel of Whale in Scotland, in possession of William de Embleton; the latter had succeeded Simon de Sandford in his custody of the hospital of Rutherford near Roxburgh in 1335 (see above) which points to close family relationship between Simon and William. (x) Later, in l342, William de Sandford "the younger" (either son of the first William de Sandford or son of Robert de Sandford) acted as intermin feofee with Robert de Helton, parson of Dufton, in the transfer of the manor of Heghheved, land in Raghton and Gatescales a moiety of the manors of Tybay and Roundthwayt, (note. the petition of Robert de Sandford in 1327), two parts of the manor of Blencarn, and one third part of the manor of
(a) Bp. Halton's Regg. (see C. & W. (N.S) XXI, 231)
(b) Plac. de Banco. 1327, Mich. (20 d.)
© ibid 1328, Easter (132 d.) and Mich (17 d.)
(d) Trans, C,W, (N.S.) XVI., 144.
(x) Rotuli Scotiae & Pat. Rolls 29 E.III
20
Levyngton in Cos. Cumberland and Westmorland, and lands in Cambridgeshire, Huntingdon and Yorks, from William Lengleis the older and William Lengleis his son, Knight, Juliana and Agnes his daughters, and Thomas, son of John Lengleis. (a) This is the first mention of that intimate association between the families of Sandford and Lengleys which ended in the accession of Askham, Asby and Helton to the former family.
In 1345 Thomas de Sandford (probably son of Robert de Sandford) and William de Sandford act as attorneys before the Court of Chancery for John de Wateby, John de Morland, and Thomas de Warthecopp, who had been enfeoffed by the king of the estates of Robert de Clifford late1y dead, his son and heir being a minor in the King' s ward. (b) The Cliffords were of course now overlords of the Sandfords, the heiress of the Veteriponts having married into that family and Sandford itself formed part of their lordship.
In 1347/8 is a grant from the King to William de Sandford, King's Clerk, of the wardenship of the Chapel of la Quele (Whale) in Scotland, © already referred to. Three years later, in 1350, William de Sandford, clerk, has the custody of the lands of Stephen le Eyr in Pubbeley near Whitewell, Co. Derby, granted to him (d) and in the same year William de Sandford and Thomas de Sandford act as attorneys for Thomas de Stirkeland (Strickland), knight, going, to Ireland on the King's business. (e) In 1351 a William de Sandford is presented to the church of Escryk, in the diocese of York (f) but it is possible that this is another member of the family to the foregoing, as the above William de Sandford seems to have specialized rather in legal and money-making pursuits than in purely church affairs. In 1354 a note to the Inquisition on William de Houton of Houton, co. Yorks,. states that he had married without the license of William Sandford , to whom the King had committed his custody and marriage. (g) This seems to be the same William de Sandford who had custody of the lands of Stephen le Eyr in 1350, and the same year (1354) we find another grant to him, this time of the post of Keeper of the Writs in the Common Bench.
In 1355 Roger de Clifford, Lord of Westmorland, going to Gascony in the company of Thomas de Bello Campo, Earl of Warwick, nominates Hugh de Boure, Thomas de Sandford, Thomas de Musgrave, Knight, and William de Sandford as his attorneys during his absence from England. (h)
(a) Pat. Rolls, 16. E.III, memb. 18.
(b) Fine Rolls, 19 .E.III, memb. 36.
© Pat. Rolls, 21 E.l1I, memb. 4.
(d) Yeatman's "Feudal Hist, of Debysh." II, 33.
(e) Pat. Rolls, 24, E.III memb. 40.
(f) Do 25, E.III memb. 2.
(g) Inq. P. R., C. E. III,129/17.
(h) Pat. Rolls, 29 .E.III, memb. 26.
21
In 1359 William de Sandford and others are sent to York to report on the state of the castle there (a) and in the same year we find William de Sandford (probably the other one) presented to the living of Workington in Cumberland. (b)
In 1361 died John de Soulby, rector of Musgrave. and by his will proved before the Archdeacon of London 26th November 1361 and before the Bishop of Carlisle 10th January 1361-62 leaves to William de Sandford, priest, a book called a "portiforium", together with legacies to Edmund de Sandford © of whom more later.
In 1362 Robert Wendout, "going beyond the seas", appoints William de Sandford, clerk, and Edmund Fitz Johaun as his attorneys, (d) and in 1367 is a grant to William de Sandford, King's Clerk, of the prebend of Lumleye in the Collegiate Church of Chestre "in the Strete" in the diocese of Durham. (e)
In 1370 we find an entry in the Issue Roll of Thomas de Brantingham, Lord High Treasurer of England, under date July 17th, of the repayment to Wi1liam de Sandford of £20 which he lent the King (Edward III) on July 13th, (f) This was a fair sum in those days, probably equal to about £500 in our money. Evidently William was intimately associated with the Court and in the personal entourage of the King. The same year is another entry of the payment to William de Sandford, clerk to the Keeper of the Rolls and Writs of the Bench (see the grant of 1354) of his annual stipend of 10 marks in aid of his support and that of his clerks in that office, (g) The stipend of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to King Edward III was only 40 marks per annum, and that of the Attorney General only 15 marks, so William de Sandford's post was not a badly paid one. Of course the actual value of the post lay more in the perquisites attached to it, and in the opportunity it gave for obtaining other legal work,
In 1373 Edmund de Sandford, second son of Robert de Sandford of Sandford , obtained the manor of Askham, and William de Sandford "the younger" acted as interim feofee in the transfer. This, however, more properly belongs to the history of the Askham branch, where it will be dealt with fully.
(a) Pat. Rolls, 33 .E. III, memb. 5 d.
(b) Yorks. Archl, Journal XXV, 175n.
© Testamertia Kaleolensia," R.S. Ferguson.
(d) Pat. Rolls, 26 E.III memb. 6.
(e) Do 41 E.III, memb. 5.
(f) Issue Roll, Thos. de Brantingham, 44. EIII.
(g) ibid.
22
In 1379 and 1380 are two very interesting documents which give us much family information. The first of those is a license from the King in consideration of the sum of £50 paid by William de Sandford, Thomas Daunay, William de Hornby, and Thomas de Hornby, for the alienation in rnortmain by them of a messuage in Thorp S Salvayn, co. Yorks held by John Duke of Lancaster (John of Gaunt) as of the honour of Tykill, and £10 of rents issuing from two messuages and 10 shops in the parishes of St. Michael and St. Peter Cornhill and St. Olave Mugwelstrete, (x) London, held of the king in free burgage, to a chaplain for celebrating divine service daily in the chapel of St. Mary in Thorp Salvayn, This is dated 12th November, 3 Richard II. (a) The property in Mugwelstrete, consisting of a messuage and garden, had been bought by William de Sandford from John de Romesay for £120 on 14 July, 1365. (38 E.III).
Then on the Monday after St. Barnabus 3 Richard II, is an indenture made at London whereby William de Sandford, William de Hornby, and Thomas de Hornby (Thomas Daunay not mentioned) found a chantry of one chaplain in the chapel of St. Mary on the north side of Thorp Salvayn, Co,York, granting the said chaplain for his support and messuage there the yearly rent of 15 marks issuing from the shops and messuages in London detailed in the license, that he may pray for the souls of Sir William de Sandford, late rector of the church of St. Botolph, his kindred, the late King, Sir Robert Parnyng, Sir Reginald de la Pole, Sir John de Kirkeby, late Bishop of Carlisle, Sir William de Zouche, late Archbishop of York, Sir William de Edyngton, late Bishop of Winchester, Sir John Bardolf, Sir Simon de Sandford, his ancestors and others (all these were evidently dead) and for the good estate of the king, Sir John Duke of Lancaster, Sir Thomas de Hatfield, Bishop of Durham, Sir William Marreys, Abbot of St. Mary' s, York, Thomas Daunay, the brothers and sisters of the said William de Sandford and their children, William de Sandford, rector of the church of Marham, and others. (b)
This William de Sandford is almost certainly (by his London property and from the names for whom and for whose souls the chaplain was instructed to pray, a number of
(x) In Silver St., Wood St,, not rebuilt after the Great Fire. Called "Olav de Mokewell",
i.e., Monkwell, in the Texacio of Pope Nicholas 1291.
(a) Pat. Rolls, 3 R.II, memb. 12.
(b) ditto. . 4 R.II, memb. 42.
23
whom were prominent men about the court) the same William de Sandford who was Keeper of the Writs in the King's Bench, and lent money to the King. Thomas Daunay was party with William de Sandford the elder, clerk, and William de Sandford the younger to an indenture between Sir Robert Swinbume and Edmund de Sandford of Askham in 1372, and he again appears in con junction with William de Sandford and Edmund de Sandford in 1375, by which year William de Sandford the elder, cleric, was dead, as Robert de Thornburgh gives a receipt to his executors for legacies to his (Robert's) children. (See history of the Askham branch.) This connects William de Sandford with the Westmorland family. Later on, Thomas de Hornby leaves in his will in 1401 a vestment to each of the churches of Warcop & Thorpe Salvayn, and mentions "William de Sandford, my deceased uncle." (a) William de Hornby held the manor of Bampton Cundale in 43 Edward III (1369/70) as co-trustee with the Abbott of Hepp and others. (b) Bampton is the next parish to Askham, where Edmund de Sandford settled about 1370.
William de Sandford, rector of Marham (Marholm) in the diocese of Lincoln, who is named in the chantry foundation was presented to the living of Thornton-in-Lonsdale, in the diocese of York, on 23rd October 1382,© and was appointed vicar of Gilling on 26th Apri1, 1392, (d) (16 Richard II), (the ratification of this appointment being dated 4th May 1392) (e) being succeeded at Thornton-in-Lonsdale by Robert de Louthyr. He is left several legacies in the will of Thomas de Sandford of Sandford dated 29th August, 1380 (given later), so there is no doubt that he vas a member of the same family. It is probable he was the William de Sandford the younger" so often mentioned. It will be noticed that the foundation of the chantry gives us three William de Sandfords, all presumably near relatives. William de Sandford the founder, William de Sandford late rector of St. Botolph, and William de Sandford rector of Marham of whom the first and last were living in 1380, and the second was dead. Probably the second was the brother of Robert de Sandford of Sandford, to whom the latter gave a title for holy orders in 1324. As previously stated, however, the relationship of these William de Sandfords is very obscure. A likely relationship is given in the pedigree at the end.
(a) Proved P.C.C. 8th Novr., 1401.
(b) N.&.B., I, 466
© Pat. Rolls, 6 R II; Yorks Archli., Journal, XXV, 189.
(d) Yorks Archl., Journa1, XXV, 190
(e) Pat. Atolls, 16 R.II.
24
The foundation of the chantry at Thorp Salvayn is of particular interest as it definitely establishes the connection of the families of Sandford of Thorp Salvayn and Sandford of Tickill with the Westmorland family.(x) On the tomb of Mercy de Sandford , the last Sandford of Thorpe Salvayn, who died in 1582, is a statement that "his ancestors came forth of Westmorland in the year of our Lord 1420." The foundation however shows an intimate connection between the Sandford family and Thorpe Salvayn nearly half a century before that date. The point is discussed in the chapter devoted to the non-Westmorland branches of the family.
Evidently William de Sandford died shortly after his foundation of the chantry, for we find no further records concerning him. As regards the other brothers of Robert de Sandford, (younger sons of Richard de Sandford), it is highly probable that those included Richard de Sandford of whom we have a quaint record in 1354. At the Proof of Age of Roger de Clifford,, brother and heir of Robert de Clifford, taken at Appleby on 10th August, 28 Edward III when Sir Thomas Leng]eys Kt., stated that he (Roger de Clifford) was born at Burgham on 20th July 7 Edward I11 (1333), amongst other evidence taken is that of Thomas de Smerdale, aged 57 and more, who states that he remembers the occasion well, because on the Sunday following Roger's birth one Richard de Sandford attacked him at Smerdale and wounded him, and left him there half alive (semivivum). (a) This somewhat uncomplimentary record is the only one we have concerning him.
Robert de Sandford of Sandford and Agnes had several sons, including Thomas de Sandford, who succeeded to Sandford, Edmund de Sandford, who married Idoneoa, daughter and heiress of Sir Thomas Lenglays of Helton Flechane, and founded the Askham branch of the family, William de Sandford , who was one of the William de Sandfords referred to above, and Henry de Sandford. Edmund will be dealt with fully in the account of the Askham branch.
(x) See article in "Sheffield Daily Telegraph" 1st Aug. 1927.
(a) Inq. P. M, C. E III, l29/9
25
Henry de Sandford was rector of Crosby Garrett 1377- 1380 and in 28 Edward Ill (1354/5) obtained train the Bishop of Carlisle a licence of absence for the better following of his studies. (a) This was renewed three years later on condition that he caused divine service to be performed by a chaplain in the oratory of Robert de Sandford his father at Sandford once or twice every month, (b) In 1378 he was sued by Peter de Morland, Vicar of Kirkby Stephen for certain rents in arrears, which he refused to pay. Morland won his case but remitted the debt, H. died 5 Richard II when William de Calve was instituted. © His will, dated the Sunday next before Christmas, 1380, was proved at Rose 27th March 1381. (d)
Another probable son was Robert de Sandford, King's Clerk, who in 1349 had a grant for life of the Wardenship of the Hospital of St. Leonard, Derby. (e) It is to be feared that he looked on this office merely as a means of making as much out of it as he could, for in 1351 is a commission to the Abbott of Derby and others to make a visitation of the hospital of St. Leonard, Derby, as the King understands that Robert de Sandford, the Wardens, does not attend to the keeping and rule thereof, but has dissipated the goods and possessions and alienated the lands and rents and demised them for a term of years; and so what was of old set apart for pious uses is diverted to profane uses. (f)
Thomas de Sandford the eldest son, succeeded to his father's lands about 1356, and in that year he and, Isabel his wife obtained from Thomas de Musgrave for 100 marks the manor of Sandford, by virtue of an agreement come to between them and the Musgraves. (g) Thus after nearly a hundred years the dispute as to the ownership of the manor of Sandford was finally settled, and the lordship became again vested beyond a shadow of doubt in the owners of the name. Before this date however his name appears several times in conjunction with that of his brother William as attorney for various individuals, notably in 1345, 1350 and 1355, he on the last date being joint attorney for Roger de Clifford, Lord of Westmorland, when the latter visited Gascony in company with the Earl of Warwick. (h)
(a) N. & B., I. 530.
(b) ibid.
© N. & B. I.
(d) "Testamentia Kaleslensia"
(e) Pat. Rolls, 23 E.III, memb. 8.
(f) Do 25 E.III, memb. L6d.
(g) C. & W. Trans. (N.S.) XXI, 230,
(h) Pat. Rolls, 29 E.III, memb. 26.
26
As already mentioned, he obtained from Pope Innocent VI in April 1355 an Indulgence to choose a confessor to give plenary remission of sins at the hour of' death, being described in the document as "donsel". (a) His father was of course living at the time.
In 1359 he received a commission from the King, together with Ralph de Nevill, John de Moubray, Thomas de Ingleby, and his brother or uncle William de Sandford, to view the castle at York, which is stated to be much dilapidated, and to estimate the cost of putting it in proper repair. (b)
From this date onwards he is continually mentioned in the Patent Rolls as a Commissioner of the Peace to enquire into various quarrels and abuses in the counties of Westmorland and Cumberland, and he was evidently of high standing in the county.
In 43 Edward III (1369) by inquisition of Knights Fees, it was found that Thomas de Sandford held Sandford of Roger de Clifford by homage and fealty and 3/4d. cornage. © This same Roger de Clifford granted and confirmed to Thomas de Sandford and Isabel his wife common of turbary in Sandford, on condition that they and their tenants pay the accustomed yearly rent of 1/2d. for every cartload in Sandford myre. (d) In the came year Thomas de Sandford acted as interim feofee with John de Appleby, vicar of Brough, and John Bonkin, parson of Merton, in the transfer to Roger de Clifford and Maud his wife and Roger's heirs of two parts of the manors of Hert and Hertilpool. (e) Later on, in 51 Edward III (1377) Thomas de Sandford is appointed a Commissioner of Array for the county of Westmorland, "the king having heard of the French preparing an invasion". (f) As Commissioner of Array he was responsible for calling up and mustering the local levies or militia. In the same year he was appointed a Collector of Taxes for Westmorland conjointly with members of such well-known families as Roos, Derwentwater Strickland, Lancaster etc., and two years later
(a) Cal.Papal Letters, III, 525.
(b) Pat., Rolls 33 E.III, memb. 5d.
© N. & B. I., 608.
(d) N. & B. I., 608.
(e) Pat., Ro1ls, 43 E.III, memb. 37.
(f) do 51 E. III, memb. 11d.
27
was appointed Assessor with Sir Hugh de Lowther and others. (x)
In early days the feudal system gave to the King the unpaid service of the heavy cavalry for 40 days. But the feudal lords did not bring the whole number of horsemen in consideration for whose service William I had granted their lands. Edward I accepted a quota in lieu of the whole - e. g., an earl brought 30 to 50 horsemen all told. All service above 40 days the King paid for, except in special individual cases. By the reign of Edward III feudal service of this nature had practically disappeared. The county militia - footmen - however, was a defensive force and remained; if sent outside the country it was paid in full, as its primary use was for defence of the country; and not for offensive purposes. It was the lineal ancestor of the modern Territorial Force. Its pay in Edward III's day was 4/- per day for a Knight Banneret, 2/- for a knight, 1/- for a trooper, and 2d. for a footman, whether archer or foot-spearman.
Three years after Thomas de Sandford held the above office he formed one of a Commission appointed by the King to enquire into the condition of Appleby, and the terrible condition of affairs in this unhappy town is given in a deed dated 22nd June 1380 (4 Richard II)
being a grant to the Mayor and burgesses of Appleby in compassion of their impoverishment by pestilence, by removals and by the wars with Scotland of a moiety of the profits pertaining to the King by forfeitures incurred by Merchants and others carrying their goods from thence to various places in Westmorland and selling these on Sundays in the churchyards and elsewhere, as found upon enquiry by Roger de Clifford, Kt., Hugh de Louthre, Kt., Thomas de Sandford, William de Lancastre, and Henry de Threlkeld, Justices appointed by the King. (a) In the same year (1380) Penrith had been surprised by the Scots at the time of the fair, and many of the inhabitants put to the sword, and many prisoners and much booty carried off.
Appleby itself received its final blow eight years later when the Scots in revenge for the battle of Otterbourne, sacked the town and laid nine-tenths of it in ruins, - a catastrophe from which it never recovered. From that date it became the small market town we know today, though it still retained its position as the capital of Westmorland.
(x) Cal. Fine Rolls.
(a) Pat., Rolls, 4 Rcd II, memb. 41.
28
Thomas de Sandford died the same year in which he hold the above enquiry, his will, in the pre-reformation registers of Carlisle, being dated The Feast of the Beheading of St. John the Baptist (29th August) 1380. It is given in full in the original Latin in Appendix and is of considerable interest as giving details of some of the smaller adjuncts of a mediaeval manor house. It is evident from some of the articles mentioned that Thomas de Sandford was something of a collector of works of art.
In it he desires to be buried in the church of St. Columba (in Warcop). his funeral expenses are to cost 100 shillings, and a similar sum is to be given to the poor. To the Carmelite brothers at Appleby he leaves 20/-, and the same to the friars of Penrith, The minor friars of Carlisle and the preaching friars at Carlisle are each to receive l3/4d. He leaves 13/4d for repairing each of the bridges at Warcop, Sowerby, and Salkeld, and the bridge between Tebay and Roundthwaite, and leaves 20/- to the Vicar of Warcop "for my forgotten tythes". He leaves to William de Sandford, rector of Markment (a) his water pot of which the body is made of a stone called a Beryl and the rest of silver and silver gilt. To his son (unnamed) he leaves his armour, a piece of silver "called a bowl" which he had made with a cover and a siphon of which the body is made of "an egg called Grypeck" (b) (i.e., a vulture's egg) and the rest of silver, with a cover. Also one of his best mazer bowls © six of his best spoons, and a small book of primes. (d) Possibly the "syphon" was an Oriental wine jar, not unlike a modern tea-pot, a shape still used itn the East).
To his son's wife (unnamed) he leaves another book of primes, and leaves money legacies to Alice Birde (e) Isabel de Newby and Joan her sister, David son of John Watson, William de Thornburgh, his sister (unnamed) and William Birde.
To each chaplain celebrating in the Wards of Westmorland, (i.e., in the two Wards of the Clifford Barony, exclusive of the Barony of Kendal) he leaves 2/-.
(a) ?Markham. See page .
(b) A Gripesec was a vessel used by the Alchemists.
© The mazer bowl was the wassail bowl. It was made of wood -usually maple - ornamented with silver etc., and was used for drinking toasts. Chaucer in his "Tale of Sir Thopas" says;- "They felte hyrn first, the sweete wyn, (wine), and made eke in a maselyn, And roial spicerye".
(d) The 6 o'clock morning prayer.
(e) The Birde family belonged to Brougham.
29
To Isabel, daughter of Henry de Warcop, junior, he leaves the marriage of her brother Henry de Warcop if both should live till Henry can be married, with the right to sell it to someone else. (a)
He forgives Thomas Skayffe the three pounds he lent him, and also remits four pounds out of the seven pounds owed him (b) by the Prior and Convent of the Blessed St. Mary in Carlisle. He leaves 20 marks to be distributed amongst his poorer relatives at the discretion of his executors and directs that half his wool shall be divided amongst his poorer relatives - and others in greatest need. He leaves forty pounds for prayers for his soul, and the souls of his father and mother, his brother William, his wives (evidently he had been married twice) and all the faithful dead. And he directs that every chaplain be bound to celebrate for him a trentale © every year at the feasts at which they ought to celebrate. And for the celebration of 30 trentales as soon as possible after his decease he leaves 100 shillings.
For the new bridge at Kirkby Kendal he leaves 13/4d. and he forgives John de Bank de Blaterne 6/8d. of the ten shillings he owes him.
He leaves his son Robert a rosary of coral with a golden whelk-shell set with four corals, and to Mary his wife his carriage and all the household utensils in his town house at Carlisle, together with his knife and all appertaining thereto.
To William de Sandford , rector of Markemente, he leaves a ring with a stone called a sapphire "which is the stone of truth" and a silver cup with a cover which he bought from the executors of Robert Tylioll. And to Robert his son he leaves his long knife, arid all his books.
All the rest of his goods he leaves to be equally divided between Mary his wife and Robert his son, and he appoints Robert de Ormysheved and William de Thornburgb executors of the will, (d) Throughout the will the name Sandford is spelt "Sandeforth, - a form of spelling that continued with variations for another 250 years, when it reverted again to the older form. The use of "th" for "d" was common in the North, and persisted for another 200 years; see for example the letter from Sir Thomas Wharton on page , where "could" is spelt "cowthe".
(a) This as overlord of Henry de Warcop. As overlord he had the right to make what profit he could out of Henry's marriage, Henry presumably being a minor.
(b) i.e., £3 which he had lent to them and £4 which they owed him from his estate (fief)
© A set of 30 masses said for the dead.
(d) "Testamentia Kaleolensia", R. S. Ferguson (original Latin only; badly copied)
30
It would appear from the above will that Robert de Sandford who now succeeded Thomas de Sandford was his only son as no other son is mentioned in the latter's will. In the year of Thomas' death, however, we find mention of a certain Richanrd Sandford as one of the "Free Companions" or Condottieri in Italy, fighting on the side of the Venetian Republic against Genoa. For amongst the Venetian State Papers are articles dated 1380 between Doge Andrea Contarini and the soldiers in the camp under Chioggia, in case they took that city from the Genoese, signed by Doge Andrea Contarini on the one part and the "valiant and noble men" William Gold, Richard Sandfort and their comrades,22 in number, on the other. (a) As we have seen, Richard was a favourite name in the family, and it is quite possible that this Richard Sandfort was a younger neer-do-well son of Thomas de Sandford's who had to fly the country and joined up with the English mercenaries in Italy. Of course, this is sheer conjecture, and no proof of any sort can be advanced that this Richard Sandfort belonged to the Westmorland family. It is evident that he was English, however, from the name of his confrere William Gold, and the only two English families of Sandford at the time were the Westmor1and and Shropshire ones, so at least the possibility is strong.
However this may be, Sandford now passed to Robert de Sandford, who was found to be holding the manor at the lnquisitio Post Mortem of Roger de Clifford in 15 Richard II (1391) (b) In his younger days he seems to have been of a rather turbulent nature, for in 1377 (3 Richard II) is a Commission of Oyor and Terminer to Thomas de Ingleby and others in a complaint by Richard Lescrope, Knight, that William del Bowes, Knight, Thomas de Rokeby, Robert de Sandford, and 16 others (named) broke his parks at Bolton in Wenclawedale, Westwitton and Brigenhale, co. York, hunted therein without his license, carried any his goods and deer, and assaulted his servants. (a)
With years, however, came wisdom, and in 20 Richard II (1397) he was placed on the commission of the Peace for Westmorland and Cumberland, (d) and was immediately
(a) Cal S. P. (Venetian),1, No.93.
(b) N. & B., I, 608.
© Pat. Rolls, 1 Rcd. II memb. 10 d.
(d) ditto 20 Rcd. II, memb. 14 d & 26 d.
31
instructed to enquire into the question of what smuggling had been going on from Cumberland into Scotland. (a) The next (regnal) year he was instructed to enquire into the question of salmon poaching on the river Eden, especially in close time (b) - an interesting record as showing that even in those early days the fish were protected during the spawning season. In 10 Rcd. II (1386) he was appointed Collector of Taxes in Westmorland conjointly with members of the families of Layborn, Lancaster, Warcop, Lowther, and Manser.*
In I Henry V (1413/14) a Robert de Sandford represented Appleby in parliament, but this was another Robert de Sandford, son of Edmund de Sandford of Askham, of whom more later.
He was still living in 1403, for at the Inquisition held in that year on the death of Maud de Clifford it was found that Robert de Sandford held the manor of Sandford of her as part of her dower and jointure, © He seems however to have died in the same year for in 1404 (6 Henry IV) is a petition to Par1iament by Sir Robert de Laybourne, who married his widow, which is of very great interest.
In this petition (given in full in the original Norman-French in Appendix ) Sir Robert de Laybourne, Kt., (of Cunswick, co. Westmorland; Kt. of the Shire of Westmorland in 6 Henry V and 12 Henry IV) states that he had in his care in the county of Westmorland a certain Margaret, one of the two daughters and co-heiresses of Robert de Sandford, and heir apparent to Margaret, wife of the said Sir Robert de Laybourne. And there came Robert de Thornburgh, son of William de Thornburgh, through the procuration and excitation of Thomas Warcop of Lambertsete, Sheriff of the County of Westmorland, (d) of malice aforethought, and did with others forcibly take away by force of arms the said Margaret of the age of nine years from his care and guard, and by force ravished her away, and imprisoned and threatened her, and married her to one Thomas Warcop, son of the said Sheriff, of the age at eighteen years,and keeps the said Margaret imprisoned in the county of Westmorland "by strong hand", and daily in conjunction with known evildoers threatens the said Sir Robert and her other relations with danger to life and limb to the bad example of all 1oya1 lieges of our Lord the King, if due remedy is not given. "And though the
(a) Pat. Rolls 20 Rcd.II, memb, 16 d.
(b) Ditto 21 Rcd. II.
** Cal. Fine Rolls.
© N. & B. I, 608.
(d) He was Deputy Sheriff from Nov. 1st, 1403, to Octr. 1406.
32
said riot is very horrible and henious, made by the excitation and support of the said Sheriff under colour of his office" and the said Margaret married to his said son, yet through the strength of the alliances of the said sheriff and the other evil-doers in the county, the said Sir Robert is not able to have remedy or redress from those horrible crimes, ("horribles heynoustees") by process of common law. He therefore asks Parliament for redress and punishment of the Sheriff. As a result of which petition the parties were ordered to submit to the judgment of Willliam Gascoigne, Chief Justice of the King, (a)
The whole incident is a typical example of the lawless condition into which the countryside had been allowed to get since Edward III's reign,
What was the judgment of Gascoigne we are not told but the denouement is curious for in 10 Henry V (l422) on the death of John de Clifford, the Inquisition finds that Christopher Berdesey and Margaret his wife, and Thomas de Warthecopp and Katherine his wife, held the manor of Sandford in right of the said Margaret and Katherine. (b)
These two are obviously the two daughters two co-heiresses of Robert de Sandford, but the curious point is that the wife of Thomas de Warcop is Katherine and Margaret had married Christopher Berdesey. Possibly Margaret had never been actually married to Thomas de Warcop, and the feud was made up by the latter marrying her younger sister, though we have no actual evidence that Thomas Warcop husband of Katherine is the same Thomas Warcop to whom Margaret was forcibly married. Christopher Berdsey or Bardsey was of Bardsey, co. Lancs., but we have no details as to which branch of the Waroop family Thomas Warcop belonged. Thomas Warcop of Lambersete, the Sheriff, vas a member of the family of Warcop of Smardale, for in 15 Richard II (1391) it was found that Thomas son of John Warcop as of right of Katherine his wife held the manor of Smardale, © and at a return of the fiefs and feofees of the Clifford Barony on an investigation made about 1453 for Thomas
(a) Rolls of parliament, III, 564 (6 Hy. IV, No. 8)
(b) N. & B., I, 608.
© N. & B., I, 554.
33
Lord Clifford (slain St. Albans 22nd May 1454) Thomas Warcop of Lamberset is given as holding it, (a) At the same (1453) Inquiry it was found that Richard de Sandford once held the manors of Sandford and Burton for three carucates, and rendered 19/7 per annum cornage, and the Wardship from Sandford and Burton was 100s. yearly. And that Sandford is now hold by Thomas Warcop of Colby, son of Thomas Warcop, late Vicar of Kirkby Stephen, in right of Katherine, wife of the said Vicar, and by Christopher Berdsay and Margaret his wife in right of the said Margaret, Katherine and Margaret being daughters and co-heiresses of Robert de Sandford, Esquire, who held Sandford by the same service as before, and rendered cornage of 3/4 per annum. So that after his wife's death Thomas Warcop evidently took holy orders, (b) Earlier in the same year it had been found that Thomas Warcop, vicar of Kirkby Stephen, held the manor of Colby as of right of Margaret mother of Katherine, late wife to the said Thomas, so he evidently died that year. ©
The mother of Margaret and Katherine, and wife to Robert de Sandford, was also a member of the Warcop family, for in 4 Henry IV (1403) Maud, daughter of Roger de Clifford, died, seized in dower (amongst others) of rents and services at Thomas son of William de Warthecopp and Margaret his wife, as of right of the said Margaret, for the manor of Colby. (d) So that Margaret, wife of Robert de Sandford, was daughter and heiress of this Thomas de Warthecopp or Warcop of Colby, and through her daughter Katherine, as we have seen, Colby again came to the Warcop family. Margaret's mother, Margaret, wife, of William de Warthecopp, was daughter and heiress of Thomas de Wal1erstang and Margaret his wife (Inquisition of Roger de Clifford 15 Richard II) who was herself heiress of the family of de Colby. (e) So that the manor of Colby had passed through the female line for four generations from the de Colby family to Thomas de Warcop, vicar of Kirkby Stephen, in less than 100 years.
With the death of Robert de Sandford in 1403 leaving only two daughters, the family of Sandford of Sandford became extinct, and the representation devolved on the Askham branch, descended from Edmund de Sandford, son of Robert de Sandford, (died c. 1356) and
(a) C. & W. Trans., (N.S.) VIII, 275 etc; R.O., Augardes index, vol. 40.
(b) ditto ditto ditto.
© N. & B., I, 335.
(d) N. & B. I. 336.
(e) N. & B., I, 335.
34
Agnes his wife. The Askham family opens up a fresh chapter in the history, and will be dealt with separately,
Of the old manor house of Sandford nothing now remains, its site being occupied by an Elizabethan building of little interest, with later additions and alterations. Probably the old Hal1 was of the familiar "pele" type, for protection against the Scots, and of considerable strength. We know that it had a private chapel attached to it, from the proviso in the permission to Henry de Sandford, rector of Crosby Garrett in 1357/8 to absent himself in order to pursue his studies, that he should arrange for service to be performed in the oratory of his father Robert de Sandford, in Sandford (a).
The foundations of this chapel can be clearly seen at a spot called Hall Well, close to the house, and the keystone of its porch is still preserved on the front of a barn, facing the road. It is stated in a History and Directory of Westmorland, dated 1886, that "in ancient times" a round tower or castle stood near Coupland Beck Bridge, of 40 paces internal diameter, and with walls ten yards (sic) thick, "including rubbish. This may well have been the old pele tower of the Sandfords.
(a) See page