General Notes

BARONY OF KERDISTON (II)

WILLIAM (DE KERDESTON), LORD KERDESTON, son and heir, born in 1307 or earlier, being aged 30 at his father's death in 1337. He had livery of his father's lands, saving his mother's dower, 7 October 1337, and next day had livery of the issues of his father's lands, the King having taken his homage. He was summoned to Parliament from 20 December 1337 to 20 April 1344, and 3 April 1360, and to a Council 10 October 1359. On 9 June 1340 he had licence to crenellate his dwelling-place at Claxton, and in this year he was with Edward III in Flanders when the French fleet was defeated at Sluys on 24 June. On 3 December 1340 he had a charter for a market and fair at his manor of Claxton. On 4 May 1341 he had licence to alienate certain lands, advowsons, &c., to endow chaplains in St. Mary's Chapel in Claxton, in December following made a feoffment of his manors for the chantry so founded, and on 16 January 1343/4 had Papal licence for the foundation of the college of 13 priests in Claxton. On 8 February 1341/2 (before the birth of his grandson) he settled his manors on himself and his (third) wife Margery and their male issue; in default on his son Roger and male issue; in default on William, brother of Roger. In December 1342 he was summoned to join the expedition to France with 10 men-at-arms and 10 archers. On 28 June 1346 he had letters of protection on going to France, and fought at CrÈcy, 26 August 1346, among the bannerets who served in the first (the Prince of Wales's) division. On 1 Nov. 1347 he was excused all demands for men-at-arms, and on 20 October 1351 was further excused as he had served in the retinue of the Prince of Wales from the date of the passage to I-Ioggcs (Hogue St. Vaast, near Cherbourg) and at CrÈcy and at the siege of Calais until the King's return to EngIand. He was on numerous commissions in Norfolk and Suffolk, and on 1 August 1359 was one of those appointed to examine into the defects of Norwich Castle.

He married, 1stly, before (probably two or three years before) 9 February 1325/6, Margaret, daughter and heir of Sir Edmund BACON, of Ewelme, &c., by his 1st wife, Joan DE BREWES. She appears to have died in 1328. He married, 2ndly, Alice DE Norwich; and, 3rdly, in or before 1342, Margaret or Margery COBOLD. He died s.p.m. legitimate, 14 August 1361. His widow, as "Margaret, who was wife of William dc Kerdeston Knt.," had dower 17 February 1364/5, and was not to marry without the King's licence. She married, as 2nd wife, in or before 1367, Sir Hamon DE FELTON, [3rd Lord Felton] who died s.p.m., 1379 (see FELTON). She died 25 March 1368.  [Complete Peerage VII:191-3, XIV:409, (transcribed by Dave Utzinger)]

Notes [CP:VII:195-8]:

As shown in the text, William, Lord Kerdeston, had by his 1st wife, Margaret Bacon, an only daughter Maud. By his 2nd wife, Alice de Norwich, he had two sons, Roger and William, both born before marriage. By his 3rd wife, Margaret or Margery Cobold, he had an only daughter, Margarct, also born out of wedlock. When William, Lord Kerdeston, died in 1361, there was immediate difficulty about his heir. His daughter Maud and her husband John Burghersh had been dead 12 years, and their son and heir John Burghersh was a minor. The Norfolk inquisition, where one would expect the best information---though possibly the finding of the jury might be influenced by the man in possession---stated that his heir was his son William, aged 28. On the other hand, the York inquisition found his heir to be John de Burghersh, aged 18 as son of Maud, daughter of the deceased; and so also in Suffolk in 1366, where it was added that William son of William de Kerdeston had taken possession of the manor.

In 1367 a further enquiry was held on account of the conflicting returns, when the settlement of 8 February 1341/2 (see text, p. 192) was produced, and it was found that, William the elder and Margery and Roger having died s..p.m., William the younger took possession. (The statement that Margery had died s.p.m. is an error, for she was living in 1367 and did not die till Mar. 1368.)

In July 1370 the matter came to trial at Lincoln. John de Burghersh asserted that William, the occupier, was bastard son of William de Kerdeston and one Alice de Norwych, born before marriage; he himself was heir as son of Maud, daughter of William de Kerdeston by Margaret Bacoun. William asserted his legitimacy and a verdict was returned for him. On this Burghersh appealed. The parties entered into an agreement in November 1371.

A further enquiry was ordered in Suffolk in 1372, but as the Sheriff returned that he had summoned both parties, and Burghersh had failed to appear, judgment was given in favour of Kerdeston by default.

This William de Kerdeston (by Cecily his wife) left a son, Sir Leonard de Kerdeston, who was succeeded by his son, Sir Thomas de Kerdeston, who had a daughter and heir Elizabeth.

In 1425, by fine, this Sir Thomas and his wife Elizabeth conveyed the manors of Kerdiston Claxton, &c., to Thomas Chaucer (son of Geoffrey Chaucer) and Maud his wife [great-granddaughter of William, Lord Kerdeston] who reconveyed the same to Kerdeston with remainder to male issue. Twenty yeare later, in 1445/6, thls Sir Tmomas Kerdeston and Philippe his wife by fine conveyed the manors to William [de la Pole], Marquess [later Duke] of Suffolk, and Alice his wife [daughter of the above-named Maud Chaucer], who reconveyed the same with similar limitations. Sir Thomas Kerdeston died 20 July 1447, and in 1447/8 the Manors of Kerdiston, Claxton, &c., were included in a fine levied concerning the estates of William, Marquess of Suffolk, and Alice his wife.

In 1450 further enquiry was made in Norfolk and Suffolk as to the inheritance. As all witnesses of the events must long have been dead, the returns, though obviously made with special care, are unsatisfactory. They state that William Kerdeston, knight, son of Roger, married (by banns at Bulcamp church) Margaret, daughter of Edmund Bacon, and they had issue Maud and Margaret, born in Bulcamp of lawful illarriage. Afterwards William had a son William by one Alice Norwich. After her father's death the daughter Maud took to husband John Burghersh, and had a son John. The younger John had a daughtcr Maud, who married Thomas Chauccr, and their child Alice was wife of William de la Pole, lately Duke of Suffolk. The other daughter, Margaret, married, at Bulcamp, William Tendring, knight, and had sons John and William, of whom John married Aveline, daughter of Sir John de Tylney, and left issue Isabel and Elizabeth, who died childless; and William married Catherine Clopton and had issue Alice, who married John Howard, knight. Their son Robert married Margaret, sister of John (Mowbray), Duke of Norfolk, and had issue John Howard, then living. It was Sir William Kerdeston's feoffees who gave the manors to William his bastard son.

In 1453 there was a further trial, Alice, Duchess of Suffolk, complaining of trespass by John Howard, of Stoke Nayland, esq. and his ministers at Bulcamp and Henham in January 1450/1. Howard alleged that Roger Kerdeston, chr., formerly held the estates and had issue William Kerdeston, chr., who was married in St. Botolph's Church, Norwich, to Margaret Bacoun and had a daughter Margaret. Margaret the wife died before Roger. Afterwards the said William married at the same church one Alice Norwiche, but before the marriage they had a son William Kerdeston the younger. William the father died in Roger's lifetime. After Roger's death the said daughter Margaret, at Norwich in the same hurch, wedded William Tenderyng, chr., and they had a son Wil!lam Tenderyng the younger, chr., who left a daughter Alice [and she had issue Robert Howard], who had issue the defendant John Howard. William Kerdeston the younger had issue Leonard (called Laurence elsewhere) Kerdeston, who had a son Thomas Kerdeston, who had possession of the estates and enfeoffed the Duchess of them.

This deposition can be proved to be wrong in several essentials.

The Duchess in reply alleged that Margaret wife of William Tendryn, was the issue of William Kerdeston by one Margaret Cobold, before marriage. William had by Margaret Bacon only one daughter-Maud. She married John Burghersh, knight, who had a son John, who had a daughter Maud, mother of the Duchess. She did not admit the defendant's statement about William Kerdeston the younger; but Roger Kerdeston certainly held the lands in dispute, and on bis death was succeeded by his son William Kerdeston. This William enfeoffed William Bergh and others, who in turn enfeoffed William Kerdeston the younger, who thus came into possession. He had a son Leonard, whose son Thomas enfeoffed William, Duke of Suffolk, who enfeoffed Maud Chaucer, who had issue the Duchess, who thus entered as daughter and heir and had possession till disseised by Howard.

Howard acknowledged the gift by the feoffees to William Kerdeston the younger and his issue by Joan his wife; in default to revert to Roger Kerdeston and his issue. He claimed as heir of Roger, asserting again that Roger outlived his son William and had possession.

There were numerous adjournments, but no decision is recorded. The Poles, however, retained the manors, probably under the limitation to heirs male, and Sir Terry Robsart, their kinsman, was their tenant until 4 December 1498, when Edmund de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, took possession.