Previous Toc Next

  THE STORY OF SHOREHAM            
               
          Picture
Roger de Hyda, in defence, said that "he cannot answer thereto because he does not hold the ferry-boat or ferry, nor has any claim thereto." He said that John de Gatesden held the ferry, and the Prior, " who could not contradict this," was " in mercy."    
Some years after this (1263) Thomas de Brom granted the ferry to Walter de la Hyde and Joan, his wife, on the basis of their paying him one pair of white gauntlets, or alternatively one penny each Easter and rendering the customary service of the town to the over-lord. They gave Thomas 40 marks (about £500 of our money), which must have constituted what would    
         
Picture  
         
be a practical buying up of the entire rights, subject only to the small " peppercorn " rental of one penny at Easter, or the pair of white gauntlets.    
At the same time Andrew de Lichepole " laid on " or, as we should say, " put in " his claim, probably for the services referred to as those due to the over-lord, which position he doubtless occupied in the manor of Lancing, to which the ferry was attached. A farm in the neighbourhood is still known as Licbpool or Leechpool.    
In 1302 there was an enquiry as to whether " John de Gatesden, father of Margaret, the wife of William Paynell," was in possession of " a ferry across the water of Hulkesmouth, with appurtenances in New Shoreham," which Henry de Guldeford, 92    
         
      93  
         

Previous Toc Next

Copyright © Martin Snow 2002 All rights reserved
Revised 27 February 2002