4. Lambeth, Forest Hill and Ewhurst
a. James (4) [1797-1865] & Mary Ann
In 1821, James Braby (4) married Mary Ann Churchman at Rudgwick. Born in 1799,
she was the daughter of the late John Churchman and Ann (née Ireland) of Berrylands
(now Bury St Austen’s) Rudgwick, and from 1791, on reaching his majority (after the
death of his father in 1789), of Maybanks, Ewhurst, Surrey (see below). Mary Ann, who
had been born and brought up at Maybanks, unfortunately died in 1828, perhaps in
childbirth, only 29 years old, after just seven years of marriage. James had, though,
secured an eventual inheritance in the shape of Maybanks for his only son James (5)
born in Lambeth in 1826. James had two older sisters. Mary Ellen born 1823 survived
to the age of 14, whilst Maria Ann born 1824 died in infancy at 6 months.
Their children were, in order:
1. Mary Ellen, 1823-1838
2. Maria Ann, 1824-1824
3. James, 1826-1907
James and Mary Ann were living in Cornwall Road, Lambeth (probably in one of his
father’s properties in that road) when Mary Ellen, Maria Ann, then James (5), were
baptised. Mary Ellen died in Kentish Town in 1838. It is possible that the girl was with
her grandparents who lived in Kentish Town, nearing retirement, or had James also
moved there? This must have been a great loss for James to bear ten years after the
death of his wife.
James Braby’s machine for weighing coals off the back of a wagon, 1831.
There must have been many short measures before this!
After his wife’s early death James did not marry again, instead throwing himself into
the business, with diversification. In 1831, James (4), aged 34, now in partnership with
his father, and brother John, received much credit for his first recorded invention, a
machine for weighing coals off the back of a wagon – enabling customers to see they
had a fair measure. It won a premium of £20 from the Society of Owners of Coal Craft,
and a Society of Arts Medal. In 1837, a patent was awarded for his improvements in
construction of carriages, cabs and omnibuses.
CHURCHMAN V BRABY
CHURCHMAN V IRELAND
THE HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Churchman v Braby came before the High Court of Chancery in London in 1830, after the death of Mary
Ann Braby in 1828, and in the same year as John Braby married Maria Churchman.
The plaintiffs were John Churchman and another. John was the eldest of Mary Ann’s siblings, who lived at
Maybanks. William Churchman, his brother, of Loxwood Place, was the other plaintiff.
The defendants were: James Braby (4), James Braby (5) and Mary Ellen Braby (his two living children) John &
Maria Braby, Ann Churchman, nee Ireland (Mary Ann and Maria’s widowed mother), Edward Churchman,
Caroline Child, nee Churchman, Frederick Churchman, Eliza Allberry, nee Churchman (Mary Ann and Maria’s
other siblings). James Braby (4) was appointed guardian of his two children who were ‘infants’, under age 21.
The Bill of Complaint by the plaintiffs is not listed at National Archives, and may be lost, or it may be as below.
The Answer of James Braby (5), and of Mary Ellen Braby infants, by their Guardian [i.e., James Braby (4), their
father] two of the Defendants to the Bill of Complaint of John Churchman and William Churchman Complainants.
Mary Ann Braby, mentioned in the said Bill, had died March 1828, leaving James Braby, mentioned as a
Defendant thereto, her husband, and these defendants her only children. And these defendants say they are infants
under the age of 21.
“They claim they’ve been done wrong to”. It seems likely that the Brabys were asking to be considered as
defendant/creditors in the 1829 Churchman v Ireland case laid out below, in which Mary Ann would have been a
defendant had she lived.
Churchman v Ireland had already come before the High Court of Chancery in London in 1829. This case
followed on from the death and disputed Will of Thomas Ireland, Gent, of Garlands in Rudgwick. Thomas Ireland
was an uncle of Mary Ann Braby. He was her mother’s brother. The case was cited in numerous legal books in
subsequent years.
The plaintiffs are the same as in the Braby case.
The Bill of Complaint prayed at court, among other things, in respect of the field acquired after his grandfather
made his will, that the heir [Thomas his grandson], who was one of the legatees, “might be put to his election” (see
below).
In the Answer, The defendants believed it to be true that Thomas Ireland entered into an agreement for the
purchase of the tithes of his estate at Rudgwick in Dec 1820. In 1824, having made his Will in May 1820, Thomas
Ireland purchased a close or field for £220. He died July 1827 without having altered or revoked this Will, in
which he left his estate in trust to three trustees to support his eldest legitimate son John, subject to paying certain
sums into the trust so that in the event of John’s death, one third would be paid to John’s children, two thirds to
other legatees. However, Thomas’s grandson, also called Thomas Ireland, became the heir. John Ireland predeceased his father. Thomas’s illegitimate eldest son, John Harbroe Ireland and his nephew William Stanford
declined or renounced the trusts and the estates thereby devised to them in the Will (they considered themselves
disinherited). However, the defendants proved their case in the proper ecclesiastical courts.
The defendants were, Elizabeth (nee Harbroe), Thomas Ireland’s wife; his deceased son John’s eldest son & heir
Thomas; John’s siblings: John Harbroe Ireland, Sarah Butcher (wife of James), William Ireland, Ann Jarrett (wife
of James), Mary Miles (wife of Henry); James, Owen and Caroline Ireland (infant children of John Ireland,
deceased); Elizabeth, Mary, Philip, Catherine, Ann and Sarah Butcher (infant children of Sarah and James
Butcher). James Limbert of Godalming was appointed guardian of the infants (all under age 21).
Lawyers for the heir had appealed against an election, so as not to disinherit him, without any such express or
necessary condition in the Will. An appeal was therefore made for the heir, that: ‘All my estate which I shall die
possessed of’ means ‘all that is mine and shall continue to be mine until my decease’. I think the argument is that
what was acquired after the Will was equally likely to be in the mind of the testator to pass on at his death as that
which he had when writing the Will.
Lawyers for the contradictory side argued: “to raise a case of election it is not necessary that the implication be
unavoidable; it is enough that it be highly probable”. That the whole mass of the Ireland estate was to be put in
trust for later distribution, place the intention beyond doubt.
The Decision: the vice-chancellor of the court decreed that Thomas, the heir, was bound to elect (choose one or
the other of two courses of action).
The case then went before the Lord Chancellor who decided that “All my estate which I shall die possessed of” [in
the Will] means “all my estates which being now mine, shall be mine till my decease” meaning “all that estate on
which my Will can operate”. A testator must make clear in his Will what he is passing to his heirs. Only that
which he states in the Will is to be passed to an heir. This Will therefore raised a case of implied condition, and the
heir was bound to elect. The judgment of the vice Chancellor had to be affirmed, but as a precedent case made it
doubtful, the Lord Chancellor declared “I shall affirm the present case without costs”. However, The London Law
Magazine said, “[the judgment] met with anything but general acquiescence”.
London Gazette, 1835: “by decree of the High Court of Chancery, in the cause of Churchman v Ireland, parish of
Rudgwick, the creditors [defendants in the case] of Thomas Ireland who died in July 1827, were required to come
to court to prove the debts owed them or in default they will be excluded from benefit.”
b. James Braby & Son
After their father’s death in 1846, James and John continued in the family business
together. By the early 1850s, however, John (see below) had dropped out of the
wheelwright business, in favour of James (5) – the firm now called James Braby & Son.
The Braby family was very active and riding a wave of economic growth in the 1850s.
In the 1851 P O Directory (the year of the Great Exhibition) “James Braby, carriage
builder, contractor and wheelwright” is still at 22 Duke St. In 1856 the Post Office now
lists “James Braby & Son, wheelwrights, carriage builders & smiths, patentees for
improvements in carriages, 18 Duke street, Stamford street; Borough Haymarket
[Southwark]; & 32 Bridgehouse place, Newington causeway” [also Southwark].
Presumably the works is at No 18 next door to the house. In the same London directory
are John (slate merchant), Charles (hay and straw salesman), and Edward (a vet), all
sons of James & Hannah. In addition, John’s son, Frederick was already a zinc
merchant, after having learnt his business skills (see below) with his father and uncle.
James Braby & Son flourished and diversified, with opportunities in the steam engine
market, and railway rolling stock – Janet Balchin (Ewhurst Historical Society) records
that they were contractors to the Government Ordnance Department. They exhibited at
the 1851 Great Exhibition, at Crystal Palace, “a new application of springs to a caravan,
or [coal] wagon, in which the perch bolt is placed behind the centre of the axletree, to
allow a higher fore wheel, and give a greater amount of lock, and a machine for
weighing coals, attached to the hind part of the caravan or wagon”, and, secondly, a
“machine for weighing coals, attached to the hind part of the caravan or wagon” This
appears to be the same or an improved version as he had made in 1831, followed in
1852 by a patent for “improvements in sawing machinery”. In 1854, new army
ambulances were developed, which would have been horse drawn wagons, perhaps
using the spring device above. In 1856, another improved sawing machine was brought
out. James (4)’s last development in conjunction with his son was in 1858 (he was 60 by
this time), “improvement to wheeled carriages propelled by steam, horses or other
power with an apparatus for retarding the same”, possibly what we might call a brake
(London Gazette).
Curiously, there is no sign of James (4) in either the
1841 or 1851 censuses – a single widower is not easy
to track down if no other person in the household is
known for certain, and his son James (5) is also not to
be found in 1841 – same address, missed in the count?
But in the 1848 Post Office Directory, James (4) was
living at Cranmer Place on Waterloo Road, round the
corner from the works, his brother John nearby at 23
Modern perspective on the junction of Upper Stamford St. whilst their widowed mother at 59
Waterloo Road and Stamford Street. Camden Villa across town.
James (4)
married
Emma
Glover, 13
Feb 1857 at
St Pancras
Church.
Both
Braby’s are
carriage
builders.
Above,Stanstead Lane, Forest Hill was still fairly rural when this 1:2500 O S map was made in 1895,
showing the proximity of Stanstead Lodge (James (4)) and Stanstead Villa (James (5)) who lived there in
the 1850s and 60s. Stansteadpark Nurseries were the business of noted horticulturalists Messrs Downie,
Laird, and Laing.
Below, the same area on the tithe map of 1843. the colouring has been added to show land use. It shows
that there was a house where Stanstead Lodge was built. Steve Grindley, a local historian, believes it to
have been built in the 1840s. The façade in the photo on the next page is later, possibly after Braby’s
time.
By 1858 (Melville’s Directory), James (4) had moved to Stanstead Lodge, a large house
at Forest Hill in Lewisham. The white painted grade 2 Listed and recently restored
house is still standing and used by a charity as a Seniors Club, in the lane now called
Stanstead Road. Stanstead Lodge was the only house on Stanstead Lane in 1843. The
railway had made Lambeth accessible from here by the 1850s, and the hill became an
unpolluted refuge for the gentry. His son James (5) was virtually next door at Stanstead
Villa, also in Stanstead Lane, and his nephew Frederick close by (Sydenham).
Stanstead Lodge, Stanstead Road, Lewisham
He had at the same time taken possession of Maybanks from the Churchmans, probably
in 1857 on the death of John his late wife’s eldest brother in that year (more details, 4c),
and was in residence there in 1861. Stanstead Lodge was his town house (1862 Kelly’s
Directory), still useful when he needed to be in town or near his son’s family. By 1863,
Stanstead Lodge was leased out. As the photo above shows it was a rather flamboyant
house, though may well not have been white when first built.
1861 census James Braby (4), alone at Maybanks in his 400 acres, which also included land in Rudgwick
In 1861, James lived at Maybanks, a widower, “landowner and occupier of 400 acres,
employing 9 men and 4 boys”, looked after by a housekeeper, and intriguingly had a
pupil apprentice aged 19 living with him. Perhaps James was more interested in passing
on his wheelwright skills than in farming. Like his brother John he was part of
Rudgwick’s landowning community as well as living in proximity at Maybanks. His
interest in farming is illustrated by his attendance at the 1863 Christmas Horsham Cattle
Show annual dinner at which he sat through interminable political speeches by the local
MPs. Then, there is this curious piece from the Derby Mercury, May 25, 1864.
Left, James’s son was to make a
name for himself in the Sussex
cattle world, but his father seems
to have preferred sheep. The
affinity the family had to Sussex
extended to Southdown sheep as
well as the cattle. What does this
experiment tell us? First of all,
the Braby scientific mind was as
fertile at the end of life as when
younger (the same will apply to
his son, as seen in the next
chapter). Secondly, and selfevidently from the result, the
experiment clearly sets out,
apparently successfully, to
demonstrate the superiority of
supplementing the sheep’s hay
and roots with malt, rather than
the more usual barley, over the
lean late winter months.
However, modern research
suggests the opposite. Malt and
brewers’ grains provide less
energy than barley, and there is a
likelihood that too much (>10%) will depress feed intake because their high unsaturated fatty acid
content reduces fibre degradation in the rumen. For this reason, brewery and distillery by-products are
better used as feed for mature cattle, than for sheep or calves (MAFF, 1990). However, in the 1860s
widespread experimentation was taking place. Isaac Seaman, writing in The Farmer’s Magazine, 1868,
states: “the superiority of malted over raw grain; the former is harmless if eaten to excess; the latter
poisons in the small quantity of a pint taken at one meal”. This seems to be untrue! Scientific feeding of
livestock was in its infancy in the 1860s.
Right - H&GDR Co share certificate No 1105, owned by William McCormick, fellow promoter with
James Braby and Thomas Child.
Left - Post card, Rudgwick Station c1905,
Built on James Braby’s land
His interest in railways was a theme of his business life. He was involved with the
construction of plant for the first Irish railway from Dublin to Kingstown in 1831-4, the
contractor for which was William Dargan, Braby’s almost exact contemporary. He
became an intimate friend of Brunel, one of a select group accompanying him on 4 June
1838 to
Maidenhead and
back on the
occasion of the first
trip on the new
Great Western
Railway. No
wonder, then that
along with Thomas
Child and William
McCormick, James
was one of the
promoters of the
Horsham and
Guildford Direct
Railway Act, 1860.
The LB&SCR crosses
Rudgwick, 1880. James
Braby owned
Greathouse Farm,
which included the site
of the station and the
Martlet Inn. His land
stretched from the
southern edge of the
map to ‘Linnick Street’.
Child’s daughter Jane was already married to James’s nephew, his brother John’s son,
Frederick. In the route survey, James was the owner of much of the route in Rudgwick,
which crossed 24 of his fields, between the River Arun and Baynards Tunnel, mostly
part of Greathouse Farm, farmed by Henry Jenkins, son of the former landlord of the
King’s Head. Other local landowners were Edward J Bunny (Swaines Farm), Sarah
Holmes (Hobbs Barn), Samuel Nicholson (Woodsomes) and Revd Thurlow at
Baynards. The Brabys clearly benefitted financially from the acquisitions of the railway
company, even though it would cut the land in two.
His death was on 3 August 1865, so he would not have lived to see the railway opened.
The railway company, LB&SCR, was bound by an agreement with Mr Braby “to make
and for ever maintain a station in the parish of Rudgwick”. On 2 Oct when the line
opened, it was clear there was a gradient problem at Rudgwick Station. Approval for its
opening was not forthcoming from Col Yolland of the Board of Trade. Villagers were in
doubt about the future of their station. Rudgwick Parish News, reported in West Sussex
Gazette, 28 Sep 1865, wrote “J Braby of Maybanks, through whose land a great portion
of the line in the parish passes, has built at great expense a large and commodious Inn
for the accommodation of the railway passengers, which would be comparatively
useless if the station is not opened.” Yolland insisted that Rudgwick station could not be
opened as the gradient that it was built on (1 in 80) was too dangerous, and it needed to
be flattened to 1 in 130. This didn't sound too much of an ordeal, but it meant that the
bridge over the river Arun had to be raised considerably, and it was already part built.
The part built embankments were raised and the brick arch that was under construction
was left as a flying buttress to a new plate girder bridge. The station was finally opened
in November 1865. One imagines that James and Emma Braby must have been
prominent in this event, perhaps too his uncle John, James Child, Frederick and Jane
Braby were in attendance.
The Vestry Minute Book 1799-1859 (WSRO, PAR160/12) refers to James in 1855, 1858
and 1859 proposing motions and in 1859 elected to the Highway Committee. Alan
Siney’s transcription of the 1860-94 Vestry Book (WSRO 2000) shows that James (4)
continued an active member of the Vestry (the parish committee that was the forerunner
of both the parish council and the parochial church council, and which met in the church
vestry, usually adjourning to the King’s Head). The book opens with him proposing
Henry Jenkins, churchwarden, and his tenant farmer at Greathouse, as chairman in
March 1860. Subsequently he stays on the committee for highways (1860), is an
overseer (1863), and once, in 1862, chairman. His presence in the community is a ‘first’
for the Brabys, and as lay Rector, one imagines the vicar was pleased to have him.
He spent just eight years at Maybanks.
He died in Brighton, according to his
death certificate, so it would seem
likely that the family already owned
property there. Later, his son and
grandchildren also lived, and some
died, in Hove. James was buried
alongside Mary Ann at Rudgwick
under a large table tombstone with the
Braby coat of arms on one end. The
stained glass window (also containing
the coat of arms) above the alter in
Rudgwick church was dedicated to
James and Mary Ann Braby’s tomb, Rudgwick, 1865
their memory by his son, James (5) before 1870.
There is no evidence that James Braby (4) used these arms himself, which were, “or a
chevron gules between three martlets sable”, and a motto, ex industria decus, ‘by
labour with honour’. The arms are those of an old Herefordshire family called Breynton
or Brenton. As there is no written source for Braby arms
before 1905 (James Fairbairn,
“Fairbairn's book of crests of the
families of Great Britain and
Ireland (Volume 1”), the possibility
that one of the James Brabys
purloined these arms for themselves
is entirely possible, and not that
unusual!
The Braby arms on the tomb pictured above.
The Breynton arms
One can imagine him looking through an alphabetical listing, such as Burke’s General
Armoury for his own name, and alighting on Breynton on the same page, perhaps struck
by the reference to martlets which he would have known of in the Sussex county arms.
c. The Churchman connection
The map (1874-80) below shows the geographical relationship between Maybanks (west), Berry House (east) and
Rudgwick village and church (southwest) [www.old-maps.co.uk].
Maybanks drive can be seen heading south to Cox Green and Rudgwick, replacing an earlier entrance
The Churchmans were successful yeoman farmers, and all of Mary Ann’s brothers
became farmers of large farms in Sussex and Surrey, and most relevantly for this article,
one was Maybanks, near Cox Green in Ewhurst. A number of prominent Churchman
graves can be seen in Rudgwick churchyard. Like the Brabys after them they found
Maybanks location and ownership of land in Rudgwick had oriented them to Rudgwick
church.
The Churchmans came from Slinfold. Mary Ann’s great great grandfather William, a
yeoman (1655-1738), married Mary Dendy and is the first to have farmed Berrylands in
Rudgwick in 1701. Maybanks appears as freehold in the manor of Pollingfold, which
was a sub manor of Gumshall Netley. The Churchmans were an influential family
owning Southlands, which had been part of Pollingfold, and Sansomes, Pipers, (Ellens
Green) and other land in Abinger, Rudgwick, and Slinfold.
His son, John, a gentleman (1694-1771) married Jane Butcher (same family as
Frusannah Braby’s forst husband) and was the first Churchman to farm Maybanks, then
called ‘Mabings’ (probably pronounced ‘May-bings’), which he had mortgaged in 1741,
and purchased outright in 1749, from Timothy Butt. John rebuilt Mabings, to make it
fit for a gentleman - the property was first documented 1503) - now “a double pile
house with four rooms on the ground floor and two backing hearths” (Balchin, 2006),
but continued to hold Berrylands for his son William until he was of age. In 1771, he
left ‘Mabbanks’ to his daughter, Ann who then sold it to her younger brother (John’s
eldest son), William.
“To daughter Ann Churchman – Mabbanks, Dunstalls Stubb and Mascalls, also Broad
Meadow, part of Sansums and Bumpers Platt part of Southlands subject to an annual
payment of £20 to her brother William Churchman”[Will]. John’s will, 1772, shows he
owned Waterland Farm, Slinfold, Aylewards & Southlands Farm, Mabbankes,
Dunstalls Stubb, Mascalls and other lands in Ewhurst (see manorial records below).
William (1735-1789) was ‘admitted’ (in the manorial court) to Berrylands in 1762, aged
24, after which he then rebuilt Berrylands (often then referred to as Berry House).
William, who was firstly married to Sarah King (Mary Ann’s grandmother), and
secondly to Hannah Briggs, inherited Maybanks from his father in 1771. Ownership is
uncertain between 1789 and 1793.
Next, in 1789, Mary Ann Braby’s father, John Churchman (1770-1816, see above),
inherited Maybanks. In the 1793 articles of agreement of marriage of John Churchman
of Ewhurst, gent, to Ann Ireland of Rudgwick spinster daughter of Thomas Ireland,
yeoman, signed by
Thomas Ireland &
William Briggs of
Slinfold tanner, the
properties of
Pollingfold, Coxlands &
Maybanks in Ewhurst
and Abinger were
assigned to the couple
(Balchin). He and Ann
added the north wing to
Maybanks. The barns
and stables form part of
an 18th Century planned
farmyard.
A page from the family bible
of Thomas Ireland, father of
Ann Churchman. The births of
Mary Ann and Maria Braby,
nee Churchman, are recorded
in 1799 and 1808. Mary Ann’s
death is also recorded (1828).
Mary Ann’s eldest brother, also John (1794-1857), married Elizabeth Agate, inheriting
Maybanks (230 acres) in 1816. In his father’s Will – “To son John - Mabbings
otherwise Maybanks, in which they do dwell and which he [the testator] purchased from
Richard Yaldwin Esq.* also Broadmead and Bumbers Platt part of Southlands” [*Richard
Yaldwin sold Sharpes to John Churchman in 1800; he does not appear in any other Maybanks document,
probably named by mistake.] This is confirmed in the Pollingfold manorial record in 1833,
1839 and 1844 (“John Churchman holds”). In 1842 (tithe award, John Churchman), the
farm was 242 acres. The second son, William, went to Loxwood Place Farm, Loxwood,
Sussex (a King farm), and was left Mill Farm Rudgwick in 1816, the third Edward
inherited Berrylands, later farmed in Lydling near Godalming. Frederic inherited
Sansomes (where he farmed), Coxlands and Pipers. All legacies were subject to an
annuity to testator’s wife, and legacies to daughters Mary Anne, Caroline, Elizabeth and
Maria.
Mary Ann Braby was the eldest daughter. Caroline, her younger sister, married Thomas Child
of Slinfold, a marriage which would later provide a daughter, Jane, who married Frederick
Braby. Maria married James Braby (4)’s brother, John. Elizabeth married Henry Allberry, the
Rudgwick (Wanford) miller.
John and Elizabeth’s eldest child, another John, born 1818, did not inherit Maybanks. He
farmed in Leigh, Surrey for a while but then went to Tooting to manage a grocery shop! One
suspects he had not inherited the best family genes. His several sisters, one imagines, were not
deemed suitable (and were not born until the 1820s and 30s). Bearing in mind Mary Ann’s
father had died before her marriage to James Braby, were John Churchman and his brothers
sufficiently impressed by their sister’s marriage to James Braby, that Maybanks passed to her,
and then to her husband, perhaps by a marriage settlement for which no document survives?
This was suggested by Janet Balchin.
In her Maybanks house history for Ewhurst Historical Society, 2003, she has also discovered
the following in manorial records, which suggests another scenario:In the manor of Pollingfold Court Book, John Churchman alienates (sells) property in the
manor of Gumshall Netley to a Mr Braby in 1842, but the part referring to Maybanks itself
asserts that John Churchman is owner until after 1844, the last mention of Maybanks. The
fields named Maskels, Dunstalls, Wythiat, Ruet, Broadmead (not Southlands) in Gomshall
Netley are part of Maybanks in 1842 tithe schedule, which strongly suggests that Braby is
acquiring ownership of the farmland, if not the house, perhaps immediately after the tithe
survey was completed. James (3) died in 1846. It is conceivable he was the one named, but it
was his son who had married a Churchman, and may have been provided for in advance of his
father’s will, which makes no mention of any property apart from those connected with the
Lambeth business. James (4) was the certain owner of Maybanks itself from John
Churchman’s death in 1857, and, later James (5) in 1866. Manorial records are normally postdated to the next meeting of the court.

Re freehold lands called Mabbanks rent 16/- and other lands called Maskals [two
fields in Maybanks tithe schedule)] rent 8d., Manor of Pollingfold

Re Dunstalls [2 fields in Maybanks, as above], Wythiat [field called Woolwich, as
above) & Ryewirth alias Sydneys [2 fields called Ruet, as above], Manor of
Gomshall Netley
1842 – “Alienment John Churchman to W Braby – enquire parlay as to the Deed”.
1848 – “The Deed as to heriots dated 17 Feb 1763 produced & presented £5.12.6.
due for heriots? for ? on the alienation to Mr Braby”.
1866 – “His death – his son James Braby holds”.
1867 – “Deed of Enfranchisement”. [enfranchisement is release from manorial
obligations]

Re Southlands [?adjacent to Hawks Hill, Rudgwick], & Bonnsers or Bombers Mead
[field called Broadmead, as above], part of [East] Pollingfold, Manor of Gumshall
Netley
1842 - “Alien by John Churchman to Mr Braby – enquire parlay as to the deed
respect of Heriots”
1848 - “The deed as to heriots dated 17 February 1763 produced & presented.
£5.12.6. due for heriot certain for 1 ? on the alienation to Mr Braby”.
1866 - “His death – his son James Braby holds”.
1867 - “Deed of Enfranchisement discharged 1867”.
John Churchman’s mother, Ann, had removed to Kings, a house on the main street of
Rudgwick. She died in 1843, aged 73.