Outlying villages: Drypool

Pages 460-464

A History of the County of York East Riding: Volume 1, the City of Kingston Upon Hull. Originally published by Victoria County History, London, 1969.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.


In this section


The chapelry of Drypool, which became a parish independent of its mother church at Swine in or soon after the mid-17th century, lay on the east bank of the River Hull, at its confluence with the Humber. (fn. 1) The parish covered an area of 1,641 acres. (fn. 2) It was separated from Sutton to the north by Summergangs Dike, and from Marfleet on the east by the River Wilflete, a stream which was replaced by the Holderness Drain in the 19th century. A small area of Sutton parish, between Summergangs Dike and the River Hull and close to Drypool village, seems in the Middle Ages to have been regarded as belonging to Drypool. (fn. 3) The whole of Drypool—the 'dried-up pool' (fn. 4) —was low-lying ground, reclaimed from the siltlands of the lower Hull valley. A large area nevertheless remained wet and unfit for use during the winter months: this was Summergangs, a common pasture extending across the northern half of the parish.

Drypool village stood near the mouth of the River Hull, opposite the town, and consisted of a handful of houses (fn. 5) around the chapel. The hamlet of Southcoates was a mile inland, near the road leading from Hull into Holderness, and had its own small chapel. The only other early road from Drypool was probably that running northwards along the Hull towards Stoneferry, in Sutton. Near Drypool village was a ferry over the river to Hull, replaced in the 16th century by North Bridge. (fn. 6) It was at this time, too, that defences for Hull were built on the east bank of the river. More extensive fortifications were built in this area in the 1680s, when about 30 acres were acquired for the construction of the Citadel. (fn. 7) To the inhabitants of Hull the east bank of the river became known as 'Garrison Side', as well as 'Drypool Side' or 'Holderness Side'.

The village was primarily dependent on agriculture until, in the early 18th century, industrial premises began to appear on the east bank of the river, in the part of Drypool that lay in Sutton parish; this was the district later called the Groves. The new buildings included brickworks, roperies, and seed-crushing mills, and by 1732 the sugarhouse which was built by Godfrey and William Thornton. In the 1750s the proprietors of the sugarhouse built a soap manufactory near by. (fn. 8) In the late 18th and early 19th centuries the pace of these developments quickened. Soon after 1800 Great Union Street was laid out from North Bridge to Drypool village, and a small network of streets was developing around Church Street. The open space near the church was now called Drypool Square, and several large gardens had appeared in the village. Villas and corn-mills were being built along Holderness Road and Dansom Lane, and by the 1830s the first terraces of houses were being built in Holderness Road. The road pattern was further changed in 1833 by the new turnpike road to Hedon, (fn. 9) running east from Drypool church beside the Humber. The old church was demolished in 1822 and rebuilt; and school, workhouse, and Methodist chapel were all provided (fn. 10) for the growing population. Drypool was thus effectively part of Hull, and in 1837 the whole parish was included in the borough. (fn. 11)

In 1836 the ground called the Green Well, that is Drypool Square, was set aside by Sir Thomas Constable, the lord of the manor, to remain open for the use of the inhabitants. It was subsequently let each year to the promoters of the Drypool Feast, held in August, and was also used as a recreation ground. These uses ceased early in the 1930s. (fn. 12)

The houses built along the Holderness Road included Summergangs (later Holderness) House, built by a Mr. Hall and modernized by J. K. Pickard, a Hull manufacturer, about 1800; the house was rebuilt by W. E. and B. M. Jalland, who acquired it in 1838. (fn. 13) It later belonged to T. R. Ferens. (fn. 14) Among other early-19th-century houses was that forming part of William Gibson's shipyard, which was opened in 1805 on part of the ground then recently acquired from the Crown. (fn. 15)

Both Drypool and Southcoates seem always to have been small settlements. Thus in 1297 only six taxpayers in Drypool contributed to the ninth, paying 14s. 5d. all told, while the manor of Southcoates, in the liberty of St. John of Beverley, contributed 8s. 3d. (fn. 16) In 1377 73 adults paid the poll tax in Southcoates and Drypool together. (fn. 17) In 1524 there were still only 8 taxpayers in Drypool, presumably including Southcoates. (fn. 18) The two townships together provided 30 men at a muster in 1539, and 29 armed men and 5 labourers in 1584. (fn. 19) In 1672 14 householders in Drypool were chargeable for the hearth tax and 11 in Southcoates. (fn. 20)

The population was little higher in the early 18th century. About 1700 there were said to be 26 or 27 families, (fn. 21) and in 1743 there were 23. (fn. 22) During the later 18th century Drypool's growth as a suburb of Hull began, and by 1801 the population was 436; during the next fifty years it increased more than six-fold, to 2,748. In Southcoates the increase was equally rapid, from 235 in 1801 to 1,673 in 1851. (fn. 23)

The only record of parish government before Drypool's absorption in Hull is a vestry minute book beginning in 1822. (fn. 24) In the 1820s and 1830s a parish meeting was held at Easter to choose churchwardens; one was chosen by the vicar, his nominee being alternately the Drypool warden and the Southcoates warden. The accounts appear to have been audited at a summer meeting, but there are few records of the rates levied: in 1824, however, a rate of 3d. in the pound was agreed upon. The parish maintained its own workhouse. (fn. 25)

Manors and Other Estates

In 1086 an estate of 13 bovates in Southcoates and Drypool was claimed by Drew de Bevrere; before the Conquest it had belonged to Ote and Ravenchil. (fn. 26) SOUTHCOATES subsequently emerges as the substantive manor, to which lands in Drypool were attached. Drew de Bevrere's claim, against the Canons of St. John of Beverley, (fn. 27) seems to have been unsuccessful: the canons are frequently named as overlords (fn. 28) and presumably retained Southcoates and Drypool until the suppression of the college.

The demesne lordship was held by the Sutton family from at least 1227 (fn. 29) until the death of Sir Thomas de Sutton shortly before 1389. (fn. 30) At Sir Thomas's death the manor was to revert first to Peter Mauley (VI) (d. 1382) and his wife Constance, a daughter of Sir Thomas de Sutton; she subsequently married Sir John Godard. It was next to revert to Peter Mauley (VII) (d. 1391) and his wife Margery, another of Sir Thomas's daughters, and then to their male heirs. They had one son, Peter Mauley (VIII) (d. 1414). Finally, it was to pass to Sir Thomas de Sutton's remaining heirs. In 1415 the manor was accordingly divided into three shares: those of Sir Thomas's daughter Agnes Hastings, of his grandson John Godard, and of his grand-daughters Constance Bygod and Elizabeth Salvan, the sisters of Peter Mauley (VIII). (fn. 31)

The share of Agnes Hastings was granted in 1423 to George Bulmer; (fn. 32) it was forfeited to the Crown in 1537 after the rebellion of Sir John Bulmer, (fn. 33) but his son Sir Ralph was restored in 1548 and held this share of Drypool at his death in 1558. (fn. 34) It was divided between Ralph's eight daughters (fn. 35) and its further history is confused. In 1563–4 one daughter, Joan Cholmeley, sold her part to Robert Hogg and William Watson. In the same year Frances Constable sold her part to Anthony Smethley and Thomas Rokeby. (fn. 36) In 1565 Millicent Graye sold her part to Henry Curdeux, (fn. 37) and he sold it to Thomas Dalton in 1574; John Dalton exchanged it with Joseph and John Micklethwaite in 1653. (fn. 38) In 1566 Dorothy Williamson sold her part to George Bowes and Thomas Grymston. In 1569–70 Bridget Norton and Barbara Farley sold their parts to George Bowes, Michael Tempest, and Edmund Smythson. (fn. 39) There are other references to parts of the former Hastings share of the manor, which seems to have remained fragmented. Thus an eighth part was sold by Ralph Clarke to James Typling and Thomas Bromflet in 1596–7, (fn. 40) and a sixteenth part was held by the Bromflets until at least 1637. (fn. 41) The Typlings sold their sixteenth part to Leonard Scott in 1615–16. (fn. 42)

The third share which fell to John Godard in 1415 was still held by the Godards in 1424; by 1511 Henry Ughtred seems to have succeeded to part of it, (fn. 43) perhaps by the marriage of Margaret Godard to Sir Thomas Ughtred some time before 1398. (fn. 44) In 1527 Robert Ughtred granted it to Cardinal Wolsey. (fn. 45) After Wolsey's fall the share was granted by the Crown to Sir Marmaduke Constable in 1535. (fn. 46) Another part of the Godard share seems to have passed to the Stapleton family, who held it until 1554 when it was granted to Thomas Alrede, Christopher Estofte, and Hugh Hungate. (fn. 47)

The history of the remaining third share is confused. The sixth part inherited by Constance Bygod passed to her grandson Ralph in 1461–2. (fn. 48) It may have been acquired by the Everinghams, as was his share of Sutton. (fn. 49) It was perhaps most of this part which Thomas Hennage sold to John St. Quintin in 1558. (fn. 50) Matthew St. Quintin sold five parts of a sixth part (i.e. 5/36) of the manor to Thomas Dalton in 1569, (fn. 51) and the Daltons held land here until the end of the 17th century. (fn. 52) There were further dealings in this holding in 1703 and 1764–5; on the latter occasion George Garnett became the owner. (fn. 53)

The sixth part falling to Elizabeth Salvan in 1415 remained in her family until at least 1472. (fn. 54) Before 1548 it seems to have passed in part to Sir William Knowles, of Bilton, (fn. 55) and thence to his son-in-law John Stanhope. The heir to this property in 1582 was William Alford. (fn. 56) Possibly connected with the Salvan part is the ninth of the manor which was sold by Alford Truslove to Richard Milner in 1629–30, and by the Milners to Israel Popple in 1649. (fn. 57) The rest of the Salvan sixth part apparently descended, like Sutton, to Sir William Sydney and to the Corporation of Hull. (fn. 58)

By the 18th century Drypool and Southcoates had thus become divided among numerous landlords many of whom did not enjoy manorial rights in respect of their land. The fragmented pattern of ownership is clearly revealed in the Southcoates inclosure awards of 1748 and 1758, (fn. 59) when no lords of the manor are mentioned. Only in the late 16th century can those exercising their rights be identified. In 1576, for example, the manorial court of Southcoates was held by the Corporation of Hull and John Stanhope, both perhaps in right of the Salvan sixth share of 1415, Philip Constable, for the Godard third, Thomas Dalton, for the Bygod sixth, and John Cockerell, Ralph Brown, Richard Hogg, and the heirs of Robert Hogg, presumably all for the Hastings third. (fn. 60)

After the division of Southcoates manor in 1415 lands in Drypool were attached to the various shares. By the 16th century several of these estates in Drypool were being described as 'manors', (fn. 61) and in the early 19th century Sir Thomas Constable was regarded as lord of the manor of Drypool. The Constables may have held manorial courts in respect of their share, and in 1823, when Sir Thomas Constable granted land to the parish, the vicar and churchwardens were held to owe suit and service at his courts. (fn. 62)

In 1086 the Archbishop of York held a berewick of three bovates of land in Drypool and one carucate in Southcoates; he also exercised some jurisdiction (soke) over a further five bovates in Drypool. (fn. 63) The archbishop's overlordship continued until at least the early 14th century. (fn. 64) The Meaux family held an estate under the archbishops from at least 1299 (fn. 65) until 1379, when Thomas of Meaux quitclaimed land in Drypool to John Constable and Ralph Hastings. (fn. 66) In 1405 Hastings's former lands were granted by the Crown, after his forfeiture for rebellion, to Henry Lounde for life. (fn. 67) The Hastings family may have regained this land and joined it to their share of Southcoates manor. The Constable part of the Meaux family holding may have been similarly attached to the Constables' share of the manor. (fn. 68)

Several temporal estates in Drypool and Southcoates belonged to religious houses, all of which had land in neighbouring Sutton, too. (fn. 69) The Hull Charterhouse property was probably in that part of Drypool lying in Sutton parish, (fn. 70) and it may have descended with the other Charterhouse land in Sutton. Thornton Abbey (Lincs.) began to acquire its estate here at least as early as 1217, when it secured a lease of pasturage in Drypool and Southcoates; at the Dissolution its Drypool lands were worth over £5 a year. (fn. 71) At least part of the estate, including 1½ bovates of land, was granted to John and Joan Constable in 1554; (fn. 72) another grant of former Thornton land here was made in 1574–5, to John Sonkye and Percival Gunson. (fn. 73) Meaux Abbey may have acquired its first interest in Drypool in 1235–49, again with a lease of pasturage in Drypool and Southcoates; at the Dissolution its property here was worth nearly £4 a year. (fn. 74) The estate was in that part of Drypool lying in Sutton parish, and it may subsequently have been held with the Meaux lands in Sutton. The property of Swine Priory consisted of Drypool Grange, otherwise Swine Lathes, which the priory let in 1476 for 70 years to Henry and Robert Williamson. (fn. 75) At the Dissolution the property was worth over £8 a year. (fn. 76) It was granted to Sir Richard Gresham in fee farm in 1540, was recovered by the Crown so that the new Hull fortifications might be built on part of it, (fn. 77) and the remainder was then granted in fee simple to John Green and William Jenyns in 1554. (fn. 78) The last two conveyed it in the same year to Thomas Aldred, (fn. 79) who had been leasing it since the expiry of the Williamsons' lease. (fn. 80) In 1617 Henry Aldred conveyed it to Sir Francis Jones, of London, and the Jones family still had it in 1623. (fn. 81) By 1628 it had passed to Robert Dalton, (fn. 82) and thence perhaps descended with the Dalton share of the manor. Finally, St. James's College, Sutton, had land in Southcoates which was granted to Sir Michael Stanhope in 1547; (fn. 83) possibly this was the land that belonged to Southcoates chapel. (fn. 84)


In 1086 the formerly cultivated land of Drypool and Southcoates was waste; it amounted to three carucates and five bovates all told. (fn. 85) The disposition of the arable land during the Middle Ages is not known, but there are early references to the common pasture which lay in both townships. Pasturage for 400 sheep and 12 beasts in the common pasture of Drypool is mentioned in the early 13th century, and in Southcoates one man had pasturage for 700 sheep in 1293, another for 200 in 1303, and a third for 100 in 1304. (fn. 86) The common pasture is first called the 'somergang' in 1311, (fn. 87) and in 1327 pasture there for 200 sheep, 2 horses, and 4 oxen was given towards the maintenance of a chantry in Southcoates chapel. (fn. 88) In 1539 three 'commons' in Summergangs were each described as for 80 sheep and 4 horses. (fn. 89)

By the 16th century the arrangement of arable fields and pastures becomes clearer, at least in Southcoates. (fn. 90) The arable fields were East, West, and Humber Fields, all lying between Summergangs and the River Humber, and a large meadow called South Ings lay near the Humber bank. Inclosed pasture included the Wood, near Southcoates hamlet, and Ewelands, Chimney Land, and Corn Pasture, all in the north-east of the township. In the south, beyond the Humber bank, were the growths, or groves, of unreclaimed land. (fn. 91)

The arable fields seem to have been converted to pasture, though still used in common, by at least the late 16th century. In 1593, for example, East, West, and Humber Fields and South Ings were all described as pastures, and in 1592 a grant was made of the grass of three acres of common in East and West Fields. (fn. 92) Subsequently rights in the various pastures were frequently measured in nobles, and it has been suggested that this followed a valuation of the land made when the conversion of arable to pasture took place. (fn. 93) Three beast-gates were reckoned as equal to one noble. Some holdings in the pastures included fractions of a noble, measured in gates and in 'feet': a gate consisted of four feet, and two feet provided pasture for a foal or a calf. (fn. 94)

Agricultural matters were the chief concern of the manor court in the late 16th century. Four agisters, or keepers, of the fields were appointed, as well as a constable, a bailiff, and pinders. Regulations were made, for example, about pasture rights in the fields, sheep-gates on Summergangs, and the upkeep of banks and ditches. (fn. 95)

The ancient inclosures in Southcoates included Gallen (or Gallon) Croft and Gyme Close, as well as the three pastures in the north-east of the township, already mentioned. By the 17th century there was a Great Close, and Humber Field, too, had been inclosed: in 1700 Great Close contained 9 nobles, and Humber Field Close and Gallen Croft each 1½ noble. (fn. 96) A pasture ground of 5½ acres called Humber Close is mentioned as early as 1636, and may have been the same as Humber Field Close. A close of 3 a. taken from Humber Field is mentioned in 1717 and 1727, and on the second occasion it was said to have been 'some years ago enclosed and allotted in lieu of six beast gates, commonly called thirteen shillings and four pence of grass'. (fn. 97) The inclosure may in part have been carried out after a decision made in 1657 by the Corporation of Hull that Humber Field should be surveyed and divided among the owners. (fn. 98)

With the exception of Humber Field, the first of the common lands to be inclosed was Summergangs: (fn. 99) an agreement was made in 1748, (fn. 100) confirmed and established by Act of Parliament in the same year. (fn. 101) In all, 33 allotments were made, comprising a total of 659 a. Nine allotments were of under 10 a., thirteen were of 10 a.–19 a., three of 20 a.– 29 a., five of 30 a.–39 a., and only three of 40 a. or more. These three largest went to Charles Pool (61 a.), Philip Wilkinson, of London (48 a.), and William Constable, of Burton Constable (47 a.). The parish received 15 a. Thirteen of the recipients were inhabitants of Hull, several of them merchants, and in addition the mayor and burgesses were allotted 37 a. Tithe rent-charges payable to Charles Pool were established for thirty-one of the allotments, two being already tithe-free. (fn. 102) Other provisions included the making of two dams, to prevent salt water mixing with fresh in the ditches, and brick bridges over the dikes.

Inclosure of one of the common fields had been first considered in 1675, when an agreement was drawn up for West Field but apparently not concluded. (fn. 103) The inclosure of East Field, West Field, and South Ings was carried out by an agreement made in 1756 and an award enrolled in 1758, (fn. 104) confirmed by Act in 1764. (fn. 105) The agreement recited that the fields, which were entirely freehold, consisted of 94 nobles, 11/6 gate, and one foot of land, and it set out the details of seventeen holdings. The owners of two holdings and of the third part of another decided to sell out to Charles Pool. The fifteen allotments made by the award comprised 132 a. in West Field, 126 a. in East Field, and 65 a. in South Ings. Most of them were set out entirely in either West or East Fields: only one included land in both, and one—that of the mayor and burgesses of Hull—comprised land in West Field and the whole of South Ings. Seven of the allotments were of under 10 a., six of 10 a.–39 a., and two of 40 a. and more: these last went to the mayor and burgesses (76 a., including the 65 a. of South Ings) and Charles Pool (62 a.). Small allotments were received by the Hull Guardians (7 a.) and the parish (21 a.). All the allottees were to pay tithe rent-charges to Pool.

In contrast with that of Southcoates, the agricultural organization of Drypool is far from clear. That there was arable open-field land in the early Middle Ages is suggested by references to two selions near the Humber and to an adjacent cultura in the mid-13th century; one of the selions was in Neucroft, and both abutted on Arnescroft. (fn. 106) The great southward extension of Summergangs left, however, little room for open fields of any size in Drypool. From the early 16th century onwards there are references to Kirk Field, which lay south of the village and extended eastwards to adjoin Southcoates Humber Field. (fn. 107) A Middle Field at Drypool is referred to in 1554, (fn. 108) and a West Field in 1574–5. (fn. 109) Drypool also had a meadow called Arnescroft and, like Southcoates, growths beyond the Humber bank.

Part of the arable land seems to have been converted to pasture by the late 16th century: Kirk Field is described as a pasture in 1579, and there is record of pasture for one cow there in 1570 and for 56 cattle in 1606–7. At the latter date, however, 2 bovates in Kirk Field were sold, and its inclosure may not have been complete. (fn. 110) Again, in 1617 3½ bovates in Kirk Field were described as lately converted to pasture and used for 31 beast gates; but 2 more bovates there were separately mentioned, with 3½ beast gates attached to them. This same conveyance throws some light on the composition of the former open fields: 6 selions were described as once having been arable land in Kirk Field, equally divided between East, Middle, and Town Fields. (fn. 111) Kirk Field thus seems to have been the name of the whole arable area in Drypool. A cow gate there was let in 1682, but the greater part of Kirk Field had then been recently sold by John Dalton to the Crown for the construction of the Citadel. (fn. 112) Various other closes are mentioned in the 17th and 18th centuries (fn. 113) and it seems likely that Drypool's arable land was inclosed piecemeal; there is no known inclosure by either agreement or statute.

In the years following the Southcoates inclosures Charles Pool's extensive holding was divided and sold. In 1770, for example, a large part of it—62 acres and their tithe rents—went to Elizabeth Thompson, together with some of Pool's land in Drypool. This estate was sold by the Thompsons in 1805 to R. C. Broadley, who about the same time was acquiring other land in the parish, as well as tithe rents from Pool's son. (fn. 114) The Broadleys were the leading landowners in the 19th century.

The fields and pastures of Drypool and Southcoates required constant protection from the incursions of the Humber. Banks, or sea-dikes, were built along the River Hull, as well as the Humber itself, and in the 13th and 14th centuries commissions de walliis et fossatis were frequently issued for their inspection and repair. (fn. 115) Periodically, however, the banks were broken and land in Drypool flooded—in the mid-13th century, for example, and in 1365 and 1401. (fn. 116) In Drypool, as elsewhere, it was also necessary to construct sluices, or 'clows', in the banks to exclude salt water from the land drains.

During the 16th century these matters became the responsibility of commissioners of sewers, and the inhabitants of Drypool and Southcoates were assessed to meet the costs. The great expense of maintaining a sea-dike led Drypool to petition in 1638 that other places should share the burden. (fn. 117) The court of sewers apparently did not agree to this, for a double tax was levied in Drypool to repair the banks in 1639. (fn. 118) As the result of damage done during the Civil War sieges of Hull, the banks in Drypool gave way in 1646 and there was serious flooding. Drypool bore its share of the charges for repairs, but neighbouring townships were ordered to provide workmen and, 'for this time only', money as well. Nevertheless, in 1648 and 1649 two orders were given for the sale of land in Drypool after its owners had failed to pay their assessments towards the work. (fn. 119)

Drypool and Southcoates were frequently assessed during the 18th century for the repair of banks and clows and the dressing of dikes. Between 20 and 40 people were usually assessed. In the first half of the century the amounts raised were mostly small, varying from £4 to £14, but after 1750 four out of five known assessments were much higher—£33, £50, and twice £62. Several of the assessments were made on a total of 165 nobles of pasture. (fn. 120) The inhabitants twice petitioned the court of sewers to provide a door on the dike leading to Mansdale Clow, on the River Hull, to supply them with fresh water; in 1754 the water was wanted to fill the ditches in the 'new enclosure'—presumably the old Summergangs—in summer. (fn. 121)

In the late 18th century, or the early 19th, new banks were built south of the old Humber bank to reclaim the growths. In 1816 the court of sewers assumed responsibility for one such new bank made by three landowners in Drypool, (fn. 122) and two banks south of the old one are shown on maps of the 1840s and 1850s. (fn. 123) The whole area of the old growths, as well as additional land reclaimed from the Humber, has since been taken up by dock works.


  • 1. Accounts of the parish are in T. Blashill, Evidences Relating to E. Hull (1903), and M. E. Ingram, Drypool, being the Hist. of . . . Drypool cum Southcoates [1960].
  • 2. 231 a. in Drypool and 1,410 a. in Southcoates: V.C.H. Yorks. iii. 494.
  • 3. See p. 474.
  • 4. P.N.E.R. Yorks. (E.P.N.S.), 213.
  • 5. See e.g. B.M. Cott. MS. Aug. I (1); Hollar's plan Hull, c. 1640.
  • 6. See p. 389.
  • 7. See pp. 414, 416.
  • 8. Blashill, Evidences, 14 sqq.; Hull Corp. Rec., B.B. 8, p. 772.
  • 9. See p. 391.
  • 10. See pp. 299, 325, 364.
  • 11. For the development of Drypool see the plans of Hull by Bower, 1791; Anderson, 1814; Moreland, 1834; Wicksteed, 1842; O.S. Map 6" (1856).
  • 12. Char. Com. files.
  • 13. Ingram, Drypool, 37; Blashill, Evidences, 62.
  • 14. See p. 343.
  • 15. Georgian Soc. E. Yorks. Trans. iii (2), 28–34; see pp. 417, 452.
  • 16. Yorks. Lay Subsidy (1297) (Y.A.S. Rec. Ser. 16), 123, 154. No figure for the standard fifteenth of 1334 is available: Drypool is mentioned only under the liberty of Beverley, with no separate figure.
  • 17. E 179/202/60, m. 1.
  • 18. Ibid. /168; /203/181.
  • 19. L. & P. Hen. VIII, xiv (1), p. 309; Miscellany, v (Y.A.S. Rec. Ser. 116), 96.
  • 20. E 179/205/504.
  • 21. G. Lawton, Coll. Rer. Eccles. Ebor. 379.
  • 22. Abp. Herring's Visit. Ret. i (Y.A.S. Rec. Ser. 71), 176–7.
  • 23. V.C.H. Yorks. iii. 494.
  • 24. In church.
  • 25. See p. 440.
  • 26. V.C.H. Yorks. ii. 268.
  • 27. Ibid. 171, 295–6.
  • 28. Cal. Inq. p.m. iv, p. 92; x, p. 259; Mem. Bk. Bev. Minster, ii (Sur. Soc. 108), 312; C 142/25/123.
  • 29. Cur. Reg. R. xiii. 38.
  • 30. e.g. Cal. Inq. p.m. x, p. 259; xi, p. 407; Complete Peerage; T. Blashill, Sutton in Holderness, 108.
  • 31. Yorks. Inq. Hen. IV–V, 115–16; J. W. Clay, Extinct and Dormant Peerages of N. Counties of Eng. 132, 213.
  • 32. C.P. 25(1)/291/65/9.
  • 33. E 150/237/28.
  • 34. C 142/116/78; /125/50.
  • 35. Poulson, Hist. Holderness, i. 164; C 142/125/50.
  • 36. Yorks. Fines, i. 279, 280.
  • 37. Ibid. 311.
  • 38. Ibid. ii. 55; E.R.R.O., DDRI/35/6(c).
  • 39. Yorks. Fines, i. 328, 371; Complete Peerage.
  • 40. Yorks. Fines, iv. 64.
  • 41. C 142/484/142.
  • 42. Yorks. Fines, 1614–25, 49.
  • 43. C.P. 25(1)/291/65/2; C 142/25/123.
  • 44. Complete Peerage.
  • 45. Yorks. Fines, i. 48.
  • 46. L. & P. Hen. VIII, viii, p. 342; Add. i (1), p. 348.
  • 47. Yorks. Fines, i. 174; C 139/143/28.
  • 48. C 140/479/40.
  • 49. See p. 472.
  • 50. Yorks. Fines, i. 215.
  • 51. Ibid. 366; Stanewell, Cal. Hull Deeds, D.649.
  • 52. C.P. 25(2)/894/4 Wm. & Mary Trinity; C.P. 43/436, rot. 1.
  • 53. C.P. 25(2)/983/2 Anne Hilary; C.P. 43/597, rot. 242.
  • 54. C 140/518/62.
  • 55. Yorks. Fines, i. 138.
  • 56. C 142/199/69.
  • 57. C.P. 25(2)/519/5 Chas. I East.; /612/1649 Mich.
  • 58. See p. 472.
  • 59. See p. 463.
  • 60. Hull Corp. Rec., M.62 (4). The corporation sometimes let its right to hold courts: ibid. B.B. 4, f. 290 (1595).
  • 61. e.g. C 142/25/123; /111/44; /199/69; /373/60; Yorks. Fines, i. 174; L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv (3), p. 2735; Royalist Composition Papers, iii (Y.A.S. Rec. Ser. 20), 88.
  • 62. E.R.R.O., DDCC/31/3; /111/39; /112/140.
  • 63. V.C.H. Yorks. ii. 216.
  • 64. Cal. Inq. p.m. v, p. 144.
  • 65. Cal. Chart. R. 1257–1300, 476.
  • 66. Cal. Close, 1377–81, 245, 247.
  • 67. Cal. Pat. 1405–8, 85, 88, 177.
  • 68. Poulson, Hist. Holderness, ii. 327.
  • 69. See p. 473.
  • 70. Blashill, Evidences, 68.
  • 71. Ibid. 61; Dugdale, Mon. vi. 328.
  • 72. Cal. Pat. 1553–4, 146.
  • 73. Blashill, Evidences, 71–72.
  • 74. Chron. de Melsa (Rolls Ser.), ii. 13, 88, 193; Cal. Pat. 1292–1301, 7; 1321–4, 299; Yorks. Inq. ii. 135–6; Dugdale, Mon. v. 396; Blashill, Sutton, 139.
  • 75. L. & P. Hen. VIII, xxi (1), p. 783.
  • 76. Dugdale, Mon. v. 495.
  • 77. See p. 414.
  • 78. L. & P. Hen. VIII, xvi, p. 96; xix (1), p. 279; Cal. Pat. 1553–4, 505–6.
  • 79. Cal. Pat. 1553–4, 505–6; 1554–5, 208–9.
  • 80. L. & P. Hen. VIII, xxi (1), p. 783.
  • 81. Stanewell, Cal. Hull Deeds, D.810; C 142/133/124; /406/58; Wards 7/40/51.
  • 82. C 142/444/79.
  • 83. Cal. Pat. 1547–8, 170, 250.
  • 84. See p. 300.
  • 85. V.C.H. Yorks. ii. 216, 268.
  • 86. Reg. Corbridge, ii (Sur. Soc. 141), 125; Yorks. Inq. ii. 148; Cal. Inq. p.m. iv, pp. 92, 145; see also ibid. vii, p. 424; ix, p. 303.
  • 87. Cal. Inq. p.m. v, p. 193.
  • 88. Cal. Pat. 1327–30, 21.
  • 89. Hull Corp. Rec., M.112.
  • 90. See Blashill, Evidences, 47 sqq., based on the Southcoates court rolls: these are in Hull Corp. Rec., M.62. A map showing the fields &c. is in Blashill, frontispiece.
  • 91. For other references to these various lands in the 16th century see e.g. Stanewell, Cal. Hull Deeds, D.350; Yorks. Fines, i. 88.
  • 92. Stanewell, Cal. Hull Deeds, D.747; E.R.R.O., DDSC/ 139. See also Yorks. Fines, 1614–25, 49, 243.
  • 93. Blashill, Evidences, 56–57.
  • 94. Stanewell, Cal. Hull Deeds, M.678; E.R.R.O., DDHB/8/66. See also Stanewell, op. cit. M.620; E.R.R.O., DDRI/35/6(c); DDHB/8/40, 67.
  • 95. Blashill, Evidences, 50–53; Hull Corp. Rec., M.62.
  • 96. Stanewell, Cal. Hull Deeds, M.736A, 744, 807.
  • 97. Blashill, Evidences, 61.
  • 98. Hull Corp. Rec., B.B. 6, p. 215.
  • 99. For post-medieval references to common rights there see Stanewell, Cal. Hull Deeds, M.736A; E.R.R.O., DDCC/111/21, 23; DDHB/61/9.
  • 100. E.R.R.O., DDCC/142/3.
  • 101. 21 Geo. II, c. 26 (priv. Act). A map showing the allotments made is with a copy of the Act in Hull Corp. Rec.
  • 102. See p. 297.
  • 103. Hull Corp. Rec., D.898B.
  • 104. The agreement: E.R.R.O., DDHB/8/1, 2; the award: ibid. /8/2.
  • 105. 4 Geo. III, c. 13 (priv. Act); E.R.R.O., DDCC/31/2. Maps showing the allotments made are with copies of the Summergangs and Southcoates Acts in Hull Corp. Rec.
  • 106. Blashill, Evidences, 66–67; see also Chron. de Melsa (Rolls Ser.), ii. 88.
  • 107. Yorks. Fines, i. 68; Blashill, Evidences, 66.
  • 108. Cal. Pat. 1553–4, 146.
  • 109. Blashill, Evidences, 71–72; it was probably the same as West Field in Stoneferry: Cal. Pat. 1553–4, 146.
  • 110. Stanewell, Cal. Hull Deeds, D.684; Blashill, Evidences, 72.
  • 111. Stanewell, op. cit. D.810.
  • 112. Ibid. D.912.
  • 113. Blashill, Evidences, 72; E.R.R.O., DDHB/8/46, 53.
  • 114. E.R.R.O., DDHB/8/10, 13, 15, 54, 83, 88; /45/131.
  • 115. e.g. Cal. Pat. 1292–1301, 625; 1350–4, 276.
  • 116. Chron. de Melsa (Rolls Ser.), ii. 91; iii. 285; Cal. Pat. 1364–7, 142.
  • 117. Cal. S.P. Dom. 1638–9, 35.
  • 118. E.R.R.O., CSR/14/9; /20/65.
  • 119. June Sheppard, Draining of Hull Valley (E. Yorks. Loc. Hist. Ser. no. 8), 7, 13–14; E.R.R.O., CSR/6/1; /12/1; /14/9, 20, 21, 24, 26, 32; /16/1; /20/3, 74; Y.A.J. xxxiv. 17, 19, 23.
  • 120. E.R.R.O., CSR/4/129, 173, 263, 275; /16/13, 31, 36, 52, 59,87, 93; /17/14, 44.
  • 121. Ibid. /12/27, 94.
  • 122. Ibid. /31/98.
  • 123. Wicksteed's plan Hull, 1842; O.S. Map 6" (1856).