Page:Notes and Queries - Series 12 - Volume 4.djvu/229

 12 S. IV. AUG., 1918.]

NOTftS AND QUERIES.

223

to the said Frances. By the will there was a legacy of 3,OOOZ. for the said Moses Pick- wick, but this was revoked by the codicil on the ground that the testator had afterwards made a settlement in his favour. I noticed nothing in the will or the codicil, when I read them at Somerset House, to connect either the testator or his cousin Moses with the business of a coach proprietor. They are the prolix documents of a man bent on tying up his properties unto the third or fourth generation, but do not disclose the source of his success in gathering wealth. A small point under the will had to be decided by the Court of Chancery ; see Pickwick v. Gibbes, 1 Beavan's Reports, 271, whence one learns that the testator's wife died in his lifetime, in September, 1835. MR. PIERPOINT has already mentioned Eleazer Pickwick's marriage with Susanna Combs at St. Michael's, Bath, on Aug. 17, 1775.

The story that a " Moses Pickwick" was a foundling cannot be applied to Eleazer' s cousin Mo?es, nor can it be applied to the father of that Moses, unless one postulates that, being a foundling who had been dubbed

Moses Pickwick," he then married into the genuine Pickwick family. But MR. PIER- POINT has already dealt the story a knock- down blow.

There are some Pickwick items in the Bath Abbey Registers, published by the

Harleian Society :

Betty Philips, daughter

of Moses and

arah Pickwick, was christened on April 7, 1761. (It seems unlikely that this Moses ras the cousin Moses of Eleazer' s will.)

John Pickwick and Tamer (or Thamer)

ilson, both of Widcombe, were married in 1773, and had daughters Ann, Jane, and Sarah, who were christened respectively in 1785, 1788, and 1795.

John Lansdown and Ann Pickwick were married by licence on Oct. 20, 1783, and Moses Pickwick was a witness.

H. C.

xvi. 1-13). Of the two sons of Adam de- Port mentioned, Roger is known as his eldest son and successor ; but William, I believe, is an addition to the family tree. His name is not in the table given by Round (u.s.), which includes two other sons of Adam : Hugh and Robert, who witness a charter of their brother Roger (? c. 1150) to his monks of And well (' Cal. Docts. France,' No. 1461).

The theory that Roger de Gloucester left a daughter or sister would certainly account for the claim of Gilbert de Minors ; but it would involve a worse difficulty why, in that case, Roger should be succeeded by his cousin Walter.

Coin Rogers must have been granted by the Crown to Roger de Gloucester or his father after 1086 ; otherwise Roger would have had no power to give it away. And as he could not be expected to indemnify the monks from his own property for land taken to build the king's tower, it would seem that he must have appropriated the rest of the garden for himself. When he was mortally wounded, he evidently made a hurried- attempt to save his soul by the gift of Coin, : " in exchange for the garden," as we learn, from Henry's charter of confirmation.

Although the latter did Roger's cousin Walter was

HENRY I. : A GLOUCESTER CHARTER (12 S. iv. 149). MB. SWYNNERTON'S valuable paper leaves nothing to add on the date of the charter, and but little on the names, as the Bishop of Salisbury and Robert of the Seal are too well known to need annotation ; but it may be useful to point out that we have here members both of the Herefordshire and the Hampshire families of Port. Adam de Port, as MR. SWYNNERTON observes, was the Lord of Kington, whilst Henry de Port was the Lord of Basing (Genealogist, N.S.

not pass until installed at

Gloucester as castellan arid sheriff, I should think it probable that it was issued soon after the gift, rather than that it was delayed until 1109 or later. For with all deference to MR. SWYNNERTON, I do not think that it passed at the same time as Henry's charter an p. 4 of Round's ' Ancient Charters ' (No. 3). Compare the two :

1. Henry confirms Roger de Gloucester' &

?ift of Coin to the monks " escambium de

horto monachorum in quo turris mea sedet."

2. " Sciatis me dedisse Walt'o de Gloecestra

t'ram Canonicor' S'c'i Oswald! que e' ante Castellu*

de Gloecest'a. Et tibi Walt' p'cipio ut eis dee

inde escambiu' de mea t'ra scilicet de meo q'ia

nolo ut Canonic! p'dant."

Note that

(a) The grant to Walter is a new grant (dedisse), not a confirmation (reddidisse).

(b) It is a grant of the land in front of the castle (casteUum), not the garden by the keep (turris). Cp. Round's ' GeoffreyS'de Mandeville,' App. O, " Tower " and " Castle" (pp. 328-46) ; and Stephen's charter of 1136,. confirming to Walter's son Miles (inter alia) " custodiam turris et castelli Gloecestrie " (ibid., p. 13).

(c) The King directs Walter (obviously in, his capacity of sheriff) to compensate the