10 Jul Lordship Title of Sandy ID1253
Posted at 20:02h
in
County:
Parish:
Title Type:
Previous Lords:
At the date of the Domesday Survey Eudo son of Hubert (also known as Eudo Dapifer) held a manor of 16 hides 1 virgate in Sandy, which, like others held by him, had belonged to Ulmar of Eaton. On Eudo's death in 1120 his lands escheated to the crown and were granted to one of the house of Beauchamp, and this family continued to hold the manor of the king in chief till the middle of the fourteenth century. In 1201 Hugh de Beauchamp's claim to Sandy was disputed by William de Lanvaley, who claimed its revenues in right of his mother Gunnora, who held it by gift of Henry III. Hugh appears to have been in debt to the king who had seized upon this manor as security and granted it to Gunnora, and some years later the dowry of Maud, wife of Roger de Beauchamp, was declared to be in the king's hands on account of the unpaid debt. In 1241 William de Beauchamp held property here, and in 1276 one of the same name justified his right to free warren in Sandy. Ralph de Beauchamp, son of William, rendered feudal service in 1284 for one and a half knight's fees in Sandy held of the king in chief, and was followed by Roger de Beauchamp, who held the manor in 1316. Roger de Beauchamp, by alienating the manor in 1347 to John d'Engayne, severed the connexion of the Beauchamps with Sandy. The fine sets forth that the manor, worth ten marks per annum, is to remain to Roger for his life with reversion to the d'Engaynes. John held the manor at his death in 1354, and was followed by a son Thomas, who died in 1367 seised of Sandy manor, the value of which was at this time £ 10 per annum. Thomas left three sisters as coheiresses: Joyce wife of John de Goldington, Elizabeth wife of Laurence de Pabenham, and Mary wife of William Barnacke. The manor was settled on Katherine wife of Thomas d'Engayne for her life, and at her death in 1399, by a previous arrangement between the co-heirs, Sandy manor passed to Mary Barnacke, who had married a second husband, Thomas La Zouche. Mary died in 1400, and was succeeded by her son John Barnacke, who in 1409 was followed by a son John Barnacke, aged nine years. He died a minor in 1421, and his brother Edmund, who survived him a few days only, left two sisters Joan and Mary as co-heirs. The former of the two dying, Mary wife of Robert Stoneham was left as sole heir. In 1437 Robert and Mary Stoneham by fine with Laurence Cheyne and others secured the recognition of their right, and that of their daughter Elizabeth, wife of John Broughton, to Sandy manor, which continued with the Broughtons till the sixteenth century, for Robert Broughton, grandson of the above John, was holding it at his death in 1508. After the death of his son Sir John Broughton, his daughter Katherine succeeded to Sandy, and it passed before 1560 to William Powlett Lord St. John, by his marriage with her daughter Agnes. He alienated the manor in 1572 to Sir Robert Catlin, whose daughter Mary married Sir John Spencer, and her grandson William Spencer whose father was created Baron Spencer of Wormleighton in 1603, held the manor at the time of his death in 1638. His son Henry Spencer was created earl of Sunderland, and was slain at Newbury in 1646, and Robert his son in 1670 sold Sandy manor to Sir Humphrey Monoux. The manor was held by this family until 1809, when by the death of Sir Philip Monoux without male heirs his property passed to his four sisters. Sandy manor passed to his second sister Frances wife of Samuel Ongley. After her death the manor-house and park were purchased, about 1861, by the Brandreths, who in 1872 sold the property to the Fosters, and they in 1877 sold it again to Sir Robert Pearce Edgcumbe, who in 1905 sold it to Mr. Walter Graves, the present owner. The hill portion of the estate was bought by Sir William Peel, and at his death in 1858 passed to his mother, widow of Sir Robert Peel, who died in the following year, when the property passed to her youngest son, Viscount Peel, who owns it at the present day. All manorial rights appear to be in abeyance.
Other Information:
Listed in the Domesday Book:
No