See also

Family of William LUFF and Sarah MILES

Husband: William LUFF (1712-1757)
Wife: Sarah MILES (1712-1788)
Children: Mary LUFF (1736- )
Sarah LUFF (1740-1809)
Marriage 15 Jun 1735 Heyshott

Husband: William LUFF

Name: William LUFF
Sex: Male
Father: William LUFF ( -1754)
Mother: -
Birth 1712 Easebourne
Death 1757 (age 44-45)
Burial 28 Sep 1757 Heyshott

Wife: Sarah MILES

Name: Sarah MILES
Sex: Female
Father: George MILES ( - )
Mother: Sarah (?) ( - )
Birth 1 Apr 1712 Heyshott
Death Jul 1788 (age 76)
Burial 2 Aug 1788 Heyshott

Child 1: Mary LUFF

Name: Mary LUFF
Sex: Female
Spouse: William MINYER (1734- )
Birth 28 Jan 1735/36 Heyshott

Child 2: Sarah LUFF

Name: Sarah LUFF
Sex: Female
Spouse 1: Richard FAITH (1732- )
Spouse 2: Richard SCUTT (1743-1823)
Birth 15 May 1740 Heyshott
Death 1809 (age 68-69)
Burial 28 Jul 1809 Graffham

Note on Husband: William LUFF - shared note

1. The parish record of his marriage describes him as William Luff of Easeborne.

 

2. William Luff left a will which is at the WSRO. The record of Probate is also at the WSRO as LAVINGTON Ms 555, (which means that I have two copies of the will in different handwriting).

 

I have summarised the will to the best of my ability as follows (sorry - I'm not putting a transcript on here since the WSRO are very particular about getting a properly signed copyright notice before sending anything out) :

 

Last Will and Testament of William Luff of Hile in the parish of Heyshott, Carpenter, dated 1st March 1757.

I give the following to my wife Sarah :

i. 3 acres of land named Butbrooks in Woollavington

ii. 1 1/2 acres of land in Graffham - "which lands are parcels of Woollavington and Wonworth(?)"

iii. 6 acres called Butbrooks, otherwise Woodbrooks

iv. Parcel of land called Crabbets Hill of about 3 acres

v. Piece of ground on which formerly stood a house and parcel of meadow of 1 acre adjoining land of the late John Ewen.

vi. A croft of 1 acre on the north side of Woodcutt Lane called Oxherds

vii. Two crofts of 4 acres in total called Butbrooks "or of the Common Closes"

"All of which said premises" are in the parishes of Graffham and Woollavington and in the tenure of Robert Ayling.

"To hold unto my said wife Sarah Luff during the residue . . . of the lease granted which . . at my decease be unexpired".

viii. Meadow of 1 acre called Mead Brook in Ambersham "in the County of Southampton" in my own possession "to have and to hold . . . for ever".

 

I give 1 guinea to each of my daughters Mary, wife of William Minyer of Chichester, Woolstapler, and Sarah wife of Richard Faith of Climping, Miller. He explains that he gives this and no more to his daughters because they are already provided for.

 

Probate granted to Sarah Luff his Widow, 13/6/1758.

 

Notes :

a. I presume that all of items (i) to (vi) are covered by the bit about "all of which said premises"

b. I would also guess that the subsequent sentence about the residue of the lease applies to them all. But this would mean that all 6 pieces of land were held on a single lease (unlikely ?). Are they all held on a long-term lease and let on a shorter term to Robert Ayling ?

c. Clearly the status of item (vii) is completely different and he must own this freehold.

d. There is an Ambersham on the map which is very close the Heyshott and apparently well and truly in Sussex. The explanation may be that it is in the parish of Steep which was a peculiar of the Archdeaconry of Winchester. Maybe this is sufficient ground for describing it as in Hampshire.

 

 

3. There are some documents in the Lavington Archives which suggest how he came by this property (These are Lavington Ms 551/552/553 - find them by searching A2A for 'John Ewen'.] It seems that in 1740 a Richard Blackman of Graffham (I think he was lord of the manor) borrowed £100 from John Ewen in return for a mortgage. In addition he gave a bond for £200 in case the covenants of the mortgage should not be kept. Presumably, he was unable to repay the money, and in 1743 William Luffe stepped in and resolved things. ie. He relieved Richard Blackman of the bond and some land, for which he paid £37/16/- to Richard Blackman. He then discharged the bond by paying £112/4/- to John Ewen. The description of the land is as follows :

" A piece of ground on which a house formerly stood and 1 acre of meadow adjoining the lands of John Ewen on the E, S and W, and Graffham Common on the N.; a croft of 1 acre called Oxherds on the N side of Woodcut Lane, and 4 acres called Butbrookes or the Common Closes adjoining the lands late of Nicholas Ide on the S, the land of Robert Orme called Bottom Wood on the E, the land of John Ewen on the N, and the highway on the W.; land of 3 acres called Home Ball adjoining lands of William Keyse on the E, the highway on the N, the lands of Robert Orme on the S, and lands late Heberdens on the W. All in Woolavington and Graffham and in the occupation of John Ewen."

 

Some other interesting bits can be found by searching A2A for 'Oxherds'. Lavington Ms.536 says that in 1658 a demise for 9000 years was granted on this and other pieces of land in return for a consideration of 5s. Then Wilberforce Ms.176 tells us that in 1702 a lease for 4000 years was granted at a rent of 2d in return for a consideration of £90.

 

 

4. The catalogue of the Lavington Archives at the WSRO include the following :

 

FILE - Bond in £80. Richard Faith of Climping, miller, to William Luff of Heyshott, carpenter, to pay £40 16s. 0d. on 18 May 1757. - ref. LAVINGTON/554 - date: 17 Nov 1756

 

This Bond also appears in LAVINGTON/556 (see the entry for Sarah Miles, his wife, formore details). Evidently there was an initial loan of £40 which carried 16 shillings interest if repaid by the due date. Evidently this did not happen.

 

 

5. The question remains fairly open as to when and where William Luff was born. There are various candidates in the area to be found on the IGI : (1) b.1706 in Graffham, (2) b.1709 in Easebourne, (3) b. 1712 in Easebourne, (4) b. 1712 in Midhurst. As yet there is no evidence to eliminate any of these, but there are some details which point in favour of (3).

 

The information about candidate (3) is that he is the son of William Luff (snr) who left a will in 1753. In particular this will says that William Luff (snr) was a carpenter, and that he had a daughter Ann who married John Hounsome of Heyshott in 1747. So the fragments which connect our William Luff (jnr) (ie. the husband of Sarah Miles) with William Luff (snr) are as follows :

i. They were both carpenters

ii. They were both sufficiently 'middle class' as to leave wills.

iii. The marriage record of William Luff (jnr) describes him as 'Of Easebounre'.

iv. The marriage of Ann Luff (daughter of Wm Luff (snr)) in Heyshott suggests that there may have been other Heyshott connections in that family

v. John Hounsome (son-in-law of Wm Luff (snr)) was a witness at the second marriage of Sarah Miles (ie. to Thomas Tiller) - so the families of William Luff (jnr) and William Luff (snr) at least knew each other. There was also a property transaction between John Hounsome and Wm Luff (jnr) detailed in LAVINGTON Ms.556 (again, see Sarah Miles for full details).

vi. There was a John Gravely who was a witness to the wills of both Wm Luff (snr) and Wm Luff (jnr). [ Maybe this only means that they both used the same solicitor ? There is a John Graveley who turns up as a witness several times in the Lavington Archives, so maybe he was professionally involved, rather than as a friend or relative. ]

 

As yet this is a long way short of proof.

Note on Wife: Sarah MILES - shared note

1. The record of her marriage to William Luff describes her as Sarah Miles of Easeborne.

 

2. The marriage of Sarah Luff to Thomas Tiller was by publication of banns. Both were able to sign their names.

 

3. Sarah Tiller (as she then was) wrote a will in 1782, which I summarise below. Note that her husband Thomas Tiller is still alive and the preamble explains that she owns property independently of him.

 

i. A silver spoon marked JAM to 'my daughter the wife of Richard Faith otherwise called Sarah Scutt'.

ii. £10 to my husband's daughter Elizabeth, now the wife of Richard Lee.

iii. 1 guinea to each of my husband's sons Thomas and John.

iv. £5 each to my daughter's children, namely Richard Faith (the younger), Sarah Faith (the younger) and Mary Faith.

v. £30 to provide for my daughter's son John Scutt during his apprenticeship.

vi. All Real estate given to Executors in trust for the maintenance of Sarah Scutt and her children, with the note that this is independent of the control of her husband or any future husband. If Sarah Scutt should die before Richard Scutt then Richard may be given money for the benefit of the children. After the death of Sarah Scutt and after all children have reached the age of 21, all property is to be sold and the money divided equally between Richard Scutt (if he is still alive) and all the surviving children.

 

A codicil was added in 1788 which gave £6 per year to her loving husband Thomas Tiller for the rest of his life.

 

The real estate in point (vi) consists of

a) A freehold property of 1 acre in the Common Meadow, known as Ambersham Mead in Ambersham.

b) Various leasehold closes or parcels of arable land or meadow totalling 20 acres in Graffham.

(NB. This is clearly much the same land as appears in the will of her first husband William Luff. We are now told that all the land both (a) and (b) is let to Thomas Philp).

 

Note 1 : The really interesting bit is in point (i) above where she is careful to say that her daughter is NOT married to Richard Scutt (in contradiction to their apparent marriage in Heyshott in 1768). The implication is that her first husband Richard Faith is still alive.

Note 2 : By 1782 there were several other Scutt children in addition to John Scutt. Why aren't these mentioned explicitely ? Maybe the reason is that they were living in Graffham and everyone would know who they were, whereas the Faiths were probably living in Denton, Kent.

 

 

4. A really interesting document is Lavington Ms.556 dated 18th July 1758. This reads entirely as if it were a 'pre-nuptial agreement' before the second marriage of Sarah Luff (nee Miles) to Thomas Tiller and specifically mentions this intended marriage. It is a tripartite indenture between a) Sarah Luff, (b) Thomas Tiller and (c) Thomas Heather of Midhurst, Gent. It begins by reciting Sarah Luff's title to various real estate, a mortgage and a bond, and that this title is hers independently of any future marriage. It then seems to place all these affairs under the management of Thomas Heather, and after every provision there is explicit mention that Thomas Tiller agrees to this.

 

In fact the only reason for Thomas Tiller to be party to the contract is for him to agree to everything ! It includes provision for what Sarah Luff may do during her marriage - "... and all such moneys as Sarah Luff shall by her care and industry save from the rents and profits she may dispose for her sole and separate use in the purchase of some freehold estate if the said Sarah Luff shall think fit". I would even guess that an important reason for the contract is that, by putting all her affairs in the hands of Thomas Heather, she is keeping her property at arms length from her future husband !

 

The document also gives details of one earlier transaction. This was an indenture of 21/1/1756 between Wm Luff (her first husband) and John Hounsome of Liss, yeoman. Wm Luff aquires "a dwelling house called Crouch Readens together with the Barn Gateroom Lands Orchard thereunto adjoining together with the closes of arable meadow pasture lands thereunto belonging containing 12 acres situate in Liss late in the tenure of Joseph Budd together with all and singular houses, outhouses, trees, woods, commons, common pasture, ... profits, priveleges .. ". This is for a term of 1000 years and for the sum of £90, but with the provision that the property could be bought back by payment of £91/10/- "on a day mentioned to me and now since past". "And wheras the said sum of £91/10/- was not paid on the day limited, interest by the said William Luff in the said mortgages became absolute in Law".

 

Another point to note is that it mentions the bond of 1756 by which Richard Faith of Climping borrowed £40 from Wm Luff, and makes clear that this bond was not repaid on the due date. It then appoints Thomas Heather as "true and lawful Attorney irrevocable to demand sue for recovery of and from Richard Faith every such sum of money as now is or may become due". Remember of course, that Richard Faith is by now the son-in-law of Sarah Luff so one might have thought that the debt would be 'forgotten', but clearly it hasn't been. Clearly Richard Faith remains in Heyshott until at least 1761 when his third child is born, but has left by 1768 when his wife marries (bigamously ?) Richard Scutt. Maybe this debt is an important reason why he left home and turned up in Denton in Kent.