Sir Edward Gresham of Titsey

Edward Gresham

• BIRTH 1590 - Titsey, Tandridge District, Surrey, England
• DEATH 1 Jan 1647 (aged 56–57) - Titsey, Tandridge District, Surrey, England
• BURIAL St Peter Churchyard, Limpsfield, Tandridge District, Surrey, England
• MEMORIAL ID 187125022 · View Source

  ---

• After his older brother, Sir John Gresham died, Sir Edward became the sole heir ofhis father's wealth, and that of Sir Thomas Gresham of London.
• Sir Edward spent 4 years at Queen's College, Oxford before being admitted to the Inner temple in November of 1608. According to the dates given, Edward was 14 when he began college. He was a young man of 18, when he began his career
• He was 27 when he was knighted at Theobald's 12 November 1617.At 28 he is found on the roll of Gentlemen pensioners.

Family

• Son of Thomas (Sir Knight) and Mary (Leonard) Gresham.
• Husband of Mary Clerke
• Husband of Mary Champion

spouse #1 and Children: Mary Clarke, daughter of Jeffrey Clarke m. before 1626

1. Thomas Gresham, b. 1615, Limpsfield, Surry Co., England, d. January 06, 1653/54 in Fleet Debtors Prison, London, England.

Spouse #2 and Children: Mary CHAMPION m. on 1626.

1. Elizabeth GRESHAM, b. June 16, 1626, Titsey, Limpsfield, Surry, England, d. January 22, 1682/83, Spalding, Lincoln Co. England.
2. Sir Marmaduke GRESHAM, b. January 24, 1626/27, Titsey, Limpsfield, Surry, England, d. April 14, 1698, Titsey, Limpsfield, Surry, England.[2]

   ---

Disputed children

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Gresham-89

2. Edward Gresham, b. 1618, Limpsfield, Surry Co., England, d. Bef. 1704, Axoll's Swamp, New Kent Co., Virginia. Edward ‘the Immigrant’ Gresham

3. John Gresham b. 1613, England, d. date unknown, Maryland. John Gresham of Maryland

There is no documented proof that Edward Immigrant to Virginia or John Immigrant to Maryland were the disinherited sons of Sir Edward Gresham of Limpsfield. John of Maryland's descendants did name his "lands in Gravesend, England" but no such records have surfaced for Edward Immigrant to Virginia. The old genealogies that placed Edward and John as the disowned sons of Sir Edward of Titsey are believed now to be incorrect. Much of it was based on one note scribbled in the margin of the Tandridge 100 Chart of 13 Nov 1630 page 493 in Surrey, England that said "2nd and 3rd sons". It is now believed that note was written about Sir John and his sons, not Sir Edward.

Supporting data

Here is the lawsuit in England involving the heirs of Thomas Gresham oldest son of Sir Edward of Titsey. If he had any other heirs, even ones "across the seas" they would have been named. Sir Marmaduke was the only other son by Sir Edward's second wife.

GRESHAM, LAWSUIT AGAINST SIR EDWARD’S ESTATE House of Commons Journal Volume 7
2 April 1657Sponsor: History of Parliament TrustPublication: Journal of the House of Commons: volume 7Year published: 1802Supporting documents: Pages: 517-19Citation: 'House of Commons Journal Volume 7: 2 April 1657', Journal of the House of Commons: volume 7: 1651-1660 (1802), pp. 517-19. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=24605&str
query=Gresham. Date accessed: 19 May 2005.Bookshelf: Add this text to your bookshelf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contents References to Gresham, gresham
Thursday, the 2d of April, 1657.
Lord Clandeboy's Composition.
Lloyd's Estate.
Ld. Broghill's Estate.
Blackwell's Estate.
Ledbury Bill.
Proceedings concerning Gresham. Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 9, Paragraph 16, Paragraph 18, Paragraph 21, Paragraph 23, Paragraph 28, Paragraph 31, Paragraph 49, Paragraph 50, Paragraph 52, Paragraph 55,
Allom Makers.
Union with Ireland.
Recusants.
Tythes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proceedings concerning Gresham.
Mr. Jenkinson reports from the Committee to whom the Petition and Appeal of Marmaduke Gresham, Son of Sir Edward Gresham, and the Petition of Jane Gresham, were referred; the Matter of Fact upon the said Petitions, with the Opinion of the said Committee, as followeth; viz.

SIR Edward Gresham Knight had Two Wives; and by his First Wife had Issue Thomas, Father of Jane the Petitioner; and by his Second Wife had Issue, Marmaduke the Petitioner.

Sir Edward, by a Conveyance from Beatrice his Grandmother, was seised of an Estate, to him and the Heirs Males of his Body, of the Manors of Standgrave, the Rectory of Eaton Bridge, Lusted's Farm, and Rowholt's, to the yearly Value of Two hundred Forty-eight Pounds Thirteen Shillings; and, by Fine and Deed, in the Fifteenth Year of the late King Charles, conveyed the same to Trustees, to the Intent that, during the Life of Sir Edward, Thomas his Son should have Forty Pounds per Annum, and his Wife Twenty Pounds per Annum; and the rest of the Profits to be to Sir Edward during his Life; and, after his Death, Forty Pounds per Annum unto the Wife of Thomas; and the rest of the Profits unto Thomas for Life; and, after his Death, then to the Sons of Thomas, and the Heirs Males of their Bodies; and, if no Sons, then to raise Portions for Daughters; Three hundred Pounds, if but One; if more, Five hundred Pounds; the Remainder to Marmaduke in Tail.

Sir Edward, by Conveyance from Sir Thomas Gresham his Father, was likewise seised, in the Year 1643, of the Manors of Titsey, Limpfeild, Broadham, Westram, and some Houses in Aldermanbury in London, of an Estate to him and the Heirs Males of his Body; and, in Trinity Term in the same Year, suffered common Recoveries of the same; and, by Deed in July 1643, declared the Uses of those Recoveries to be to himself for Life; and afterwards, of Part, for several Jointures; of other Part, for Payment of his Debts and Legacies; and the Remainder of all to the Heirs Males of his Body, begotten on the Body of Dame Mary, his Second Wife, Mother of Marmaduke; with divers Remainders over; and in 1646 died.

Thomas Gresham, Father of Jane, in 1648 exhibited his Bill into the Court of Chancery against Dame Mary Gresham, Marmaduke Gresham, Sir Thomas Holmden, and John Holmden; setting forth the Settlements by Beatrice and Sir Thomas; and complaining, that the Settlement of Sir Edward in 1643, was procured by the Fraud and Practice of the said Dame Mary; and prayed the same might be made void: To which the Defendants answered, joined Issue, and the Case came to Hearing, and a Decree passed; viz.

'The Court did declare, That they were satisfied, that there was a Practice in the Defendant Dame Mary; and that thereby the Assurances were gained for Marmaduke: And although they did not think fit to shake the Settlements made by Sir Edward, as to Jointures, Annuities, or Debts, yet an Allotment should be made of some Part of the Manors so settled, to Thomas; and that One thousand Marks should be paid him: And did decree the Possession of the Manor of Standgrave, and Rectory of Eaton-Bridge, and Rowholts, to Thomas Gresham, and his Heirs and Assigns.'

'And the Reversion of the Manor of Titsey (after the Death of Dame Elizabeth, Wife to Sir John Gresham, deceased), with the Appurtenances, of the yearly Value of Three hundred and Fifty Pounds, are, by the Decree, settled upon Thomas for Life; then to his Wife for Life; then to his First, Second, and other Sons in Tail; the Remainder to the Daughters of Thomas, and the Heirs of their Bodies; the Remainder to the Defendant Marmaduke.'

Upon Consideration of the Matter aforesaid, and the Depositions that were taken in Chancery in this Cause (of which these hereunto annexed were chiefly insisted on); the Committee were of Opinion, that the said Decree was Erroneous, and ought to be reversed, for these Reasons:

First, There is no Proof made of any undue Practice by Dame Mary Gresham (which is the Ground of the Decree), whose Jointure was created by the Settlement of Sir Edward, and confirmed by the Decree; and Marmaduke was an Infant at the making of the Conveyances.

2. There was Proof made, in the Court, of the Conveyances, and the Causes thereof; viz. the Debauchedness of Thomas, and Marriage without his Father's Consent.

3. John Holmden, who is not charged in the Bill with any Trust, is decreed to convey the Trust-Lands, although Sir Thomas Holmden, the surviving Trustee, was dead before the Decree was made.

4. One thousand Marks is decreed to be paid by Marmaduke, without Cause for it, or Demand, by the Bill of Marmaduke.

5. That by this Decree, the ancient Settlements of Beatrice, and Sir Thomas, whereby the Lands were to continue and go to the Heirs Males, are both set aside, as well as that of Sir Edward's, contrary to the Desire of Thomas by his Bill: For, by the Decree, Beatrice her Lands are settled on Thomas in Fee-Simple, and the Manor of Tytsey in Tail, to his Heirs Female of his Body.

Proofs for the Plaintiff.

Francis Smyth, A. Fol. 70. Inter' 21, 22.

1. That about Ten Years since, Sir Edward Gresham upon divers Expostulations between him and the Deponent Smyth, told Smyth, That his Lady had endeavoured many ways to take away his natural Affection from the Plaintiff, and to disinherit him of all such Lands as were descendable to the Plaintiff after his Death; some or most of which, as Sir Edward Gresham affirmed, had but late before come into his Possession, being Lands intailed to him and his Heirs Male, after the Death of Sir John Gresham; at which, and other Times, Sir Edw. told him, That chiefly, by means of his Lady, he had endeavoured to prove the Plaintiff an Idiot, but though in vain; and that his Lady had prevailed with him to forbid the Plaintiff to inhabit, or diet with him in the House, and to lessen his Exhibition; which, he said, was something against his Conscience, and troubled him much; but could not help it, in regard his Wife had sworn, That, if he permitted the Plaintiff to live and diet at his House, she would refrain his Bed, or to such Effect.

Francis Smyth, A. Fol. 70. In' 26, 27.

2. That Sir Edward Gresham told Smyth, That his Lady had prevailed with him to send the Plaintiff beyond the Seas to some remote obscure Place; saying, The Plaintiff was such an Eye-sore, after she had Issue by Sir Edward, as that the Plaintiff's Presence bred such Discontentment between them, that he would have done it, if he could conveniently, or else he could have no Content at home; and believes, and partly knows, the Plaintiff was necessitated to take up Monies at unconscionable Rates.

To the First,

John Kirton, B. Fol. 118. Int' 22.

That, by the Persuasions of the Lady Gresham, the Plaintiff was not permitted to sit at Table with his Father, but eat his Meat in the Kitchen with his Servants; and would rather, many times, eat a Meal's Meat at some poor Neighbour's House, than come to his Father's House for it.

George Atwood, A. Fol. 31. Inter' 26, 27.

Believes, that when she could not prove the Plaintiff an Idiot, she did contract with his Father to send him to the Barbadoes; and, about which Time, the Plaintiff came privately to his Grandmother, and discovered it to her; and the Plaintiff seemed rather willing to be a Servant, than to go beyond Sea; and went privately to London, and tendered his Service to the Lady Willoughby, and Lady Bridges, as the Deponent was informed; and could not for a good while be found: And the Lady Gresham, being disappointed in her Expectation, as it seemed, so prevailed with Sir Edward, that the Plaintiff could get no Maintenance; whereby he hath been enforced to take Monies at the worst hand: The Deponent, and others, in Pity, lent him Monies.

To the Second,

John Kirton, B. Fol. 118. Inter' 28.

The Plaintiff, having so little Welcome to his Father's House, by means of his Mother, as aforesaid, did, as he believes, to relieve himself, for Seven or Eight Years before his Father's Death, take up Monies and Commodities at the worst hand.

Robert Brooker, B. Fol. 15. Inter' 27.

That true it is, That the said Defendant Dame Mary Gresham, when she failed in her Expectation to send the said Plaintiff beyond the Seas, did so far prevail with the said Plaintiff's Father, as he the said Plaintiff could never receive any Means (that this Deponent could learn) from his said Father, whereby to subsist: And he knoweth, that the Plaintiff was necessitated to borrow and take up Monies and Commodities at the worst hand, to relieve himself in his present Necessities; the said Dame Mary Gresham, his Mother-in-Law, being (as it appeared) his very great Enemy; seeking to throw him the Plaintiff down, that so she might advance her own Son: And saith, That he, and others, did send the Plaintiff Monies, even out of Pity, to relieve him in his Necessities.

Proofs for the Desendant.

Thomas Weaver C. Fol. 83. Inter.' 33.

That Sir Edward Gresham did, as a tender and loving Father, bestow free and liberal Breeding upon the Plaintiff when he was young, and at School, at Eaton College, and after at Oxford, and had special Tutors, and good Provision made for him there, and as liberal as any young Gentleman had; yet, when he came to Years of Discretion, he became very debauched, unthristy, disobedient, and stubborn to his Father, both in Word and Deed, whereby Sir Edward Gresham was much troubled; and would often say, he would settle something upon him for his Maintenance, but would never settle his Estate upon him; for, if he should, he would piss it out against the Wall: And the Plaintiff continued in his said Courses till the Time of the Death of his Father.

That, for any thing the Deponents could ever perceive to the contrary, the Plaintiff's Mother did use and carry herself lovingly and tenderly to him, in the Life-time of his Father, as a Mother could do towards a Child, being ready, upon all Occasions, to excuse his Errors and Failings to Sir Edward, and used him in an equal way of Respect with her own Son; and yet he carried himself very rudely, debauchedly, and disobediently to her and his Father; and gave his Father Cause to disinherit him: And believe, That the Plaintiff, before this Time, would have made away with every of his Father's Lands, if it had been in his Power, and never a Peny the better for it.

That the Plaintiff's Intermarriage was without and against the Consent of his Father, Sir John his Uncle, and other Friends, which were much grieved thereat: And thereupon Sir Edward desired to alter former Deeds, and to settle his Estate on the Defendant Marmaduke: And all the Deponents say, They could never understand the Plaintiff had any Fortune with her.

Richard Howard, C. Fol. 94. Int' 33.

To the same Effect: And that he would sell his Cloaths, and borrow, to get Money of any to drink; and heard Sir Edward say, That he knew not what to do with him; and that he should not have of his Lands.

Ar. Dawson, C. Fol. 100. Inter' 33.

To the same Effect: And that he would sell his Gown and Books, and Cloaths off his Back, and would do any thing for Money to drink; and hath heard Sir Edward, weeping, say, That he must be forced to disinherit him, for the deboist Courses of his.

Bryan Mills, C. Fol. 1. Int' 33.

To the same Effect: And that he would never, by his good Will, lie out of an Alehouse, insomuch as he hath seen Sir Edward weep for Grief to his very Death; and would say, The Plaintiff should never have any of his Lands: And the Plaintiff counterfeited a Letter, and his Father's Hand, to a Tenant, for a considerable Sum of Money.

Henry Jorden, C. Fol. 64. Inter' 33.

To the same Effect: And that he hath heard Sir Edward say, The Plaintiff should never have any of his Lands, except Eaton-Bridge, which came by his Grandmother.

William Warham, C. Fol. 11. Int' 33.

To the same Effect: And that . . . Edward said, The Plaintiff should never have any of his Lands, but only such Maintenance as he had settled on him, and which the Plaintiff could not sell.

Thomas Knight, C. Fol. 43. Int' 33.

Hath seen Sir Edward weeping, when he hath spoken of the Plaintiff: Having, for a Trifle, sold the Reversion of Lands to Doctor Hinton; and the Plaintiff, afterwards, causing Sir Edward to question . . . Business, and to sue Hinton; the Plaintiff afterwards subscribed a Writing to the contrary; whereby, at the Hearing, he put a Shame to his Father.

Arnold Dawson, C. Fol. 100. Int' 53.
Richard Hayward, C. Fol. 99. Int' 53.

To the same Effect: And that she had Thoughts of Love and good Affection towards the Plaintiff; and, as he understood, would have bestowed one of her Daughters upon him, if he would have been ruled.

Bryan Mills, C. Fol. 1. Int' 34.
Tho. Weaver, C. Fol. 83. Int' 34.
Henry Jorden, C. Fol. 64. Int' 34.

The humble Petition of John Warner, Administrator of Edward Cannings, Richard Eborne, and above Sixty other poor Creditors of Thomas Gresham Esquire, deceased, was this Day read.

The humble Petition of Jane Gresham an Infant, sole Daughter and Heir of Thomas Gresham Esquire, deceased, (eldest Son and Heir of Sir Edward Gresham, deceased) by Margarett her Mother and Guardian; and of the said Margarett, on her own Behalf, was this Day read.

Resolved, That the House doth agree with this Committee, That this Decree is Erroneous, and ought to be reversed.

Resolved, That the Decree in Chancery, between Thomas Gresham Esquire, Plaintiff, and Marmaduke Gresham, and others, Defendants, and all Proceedings thereupon, be vacated and cancelled: And that the Lords Commissioners for the Great Seal be authorized and required forthwith to see the same done, accordingly.

Resolved, That these Words be added to the former Vote; viz. 'And the Parliament doth adjudge the same, accordingly:'

And some other Amendments being added to the Question; It was

Resolved, upon the Question; and the Parliament doth adjudge and declare, That the Decree in Chancery, between Thomas Gresham Esquire, Plaintiff, and Marmadake Gresham, and others, Defendants, is Erroneous: And that the same, and all Proceedings thereupon, be vacated and cancelled: And that the Lords Commissioners for the Great Seal be authorized and required forthwith to see the same done, accordingly

References

• A Genealogical and Heraldic History of the Extinct and Dormant Baronetcies ... By John Burke, Bernard Burke. Page 227. < GoogleBooks >
• https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/187125022/edward-gresham
• https://www.geni.com/projects/Titsey-Place-Surrey-England/26487
• Complete baronetage; Cokayne, George E. (George Edward); 1903; Vol. III; page 104