Hanham Court and the Creswickes

Extracts from Parish Magazine November and December 1962 January 1963

HANHAM COURT

AND THE CRESWICKES

The Creswickes were said to be a handsome family. They were certainly rich and learned and one sir Henry Creswicke was knighted by king Charles 11 in 1663. He died in 1668 and was buried at St Werburgh’s, Bristol.

The man around whom much of the history of the court centred was a son of sir Henry named Francis who lived all his adventuresome and long life in the old house. Across the fields at Stone Hill (to the left from Hanham) is an old farm house called Barrs Court Farm. Standing in front of the present building was a large manor house called Barrs Court. It had stood there enclosed by a moat since Norman days. Nearly 350 years ago it was owned and occupied by Sir John Newton. Unfortunately, the Newton and Creswicke families were continually at law with one another over certain rights which both claimed in the adjoining forest of Kingswood. The Creswickes generally won but sometimes at such a cost that it was almost as bad as losing and it made these two noted families bitter lifelong enemies.  Francis Creswicke spent a lot of money but was never any better off because the outlaws who were settling in the Chase were too strong and it was worth, perhaps, more than his life to assert his rights.

When Francis Creswicke was a young man he, like all best gentleman’s sons went to Oxford and he finished his studies there in May 1661. When he returned to Hanham he married Mary, daughter of john Ridge, an Alderman of the City of London. Lady Creswicke probably found the quiet countryside a great change from the bustle and gaieties of London.

In 1685 the young Duke of Monmouth, an illegitimate son of King Charles 11, made his rash attack on the forces of king James 11. The news that Monmouth and his army were now camped in a field called Sydenham Mead just South of Keynsham spread through this little village like wildfire. Soon a large crowd of local people had gathered to see the army, whose officers took the opportunity to enlist many recruits. Squire Creswicke, and perhaps his ten children too, made his way towards the army too; he was worried that Monmouth’s men would use his hayfield nearby to feed their horses. He was recognised by an old acquaintance named Captain Tylie who rode out to meet him. Captain Tylie told Sir Francis about the campaign and showed him some papers containing the army’s plan of action. This, and subsequent conversations through accidental meetings proved to be Creswickes downfall, for amongst the many onlookers were some servants of his old enemy Sir john Newton of Barrs Court. As Monmouth’s army had used the hayfield for their horses, Creswicke was promptly accused of having sold the hay to the rebels for 20 guineas and with so many witnesses of his conversations he found it difficult to prove otherwise. Monmouth’s stay at Sydenham Mead was followed by his utter defeat at Sedgemoor ten days later.

After this battle King James sent a very cruel judge to the West Country to punish anyone who had assisted Monmouth. Hundreds of simple country folk who had followed the Duke’s army or given them food or shelter were caught and hanged. Things were very sad around Hanham, Bitton, Oldland etc., where hissed and bubbled huge cauldrons of boiling pitch and tar into which were thrown the bodies of the victims.

Francis Creswicke was not hanged, but one July day the troopers rode out from Bristol to arrest him and take him to Gloucester jail charged with high treason. The local people would have watched him go with sadness for the Creswickes were much loved and there were no other gentry living here besides them and Squire Jones of Hanham Hall. The guards and their prisoner stopped the night at Thornbury and next day saw Sir Francis locked up in the damp and dirty prison at Gloucester.   

Time dragged on slowly and the trail was postponed many times because Newton of Barrs court said that some of the principal witnesses against Creswicke were ill. This treatment almost drove Creswicke mad, but other people were working for the unhappy prisoner who was almost ruined in health as well as in the pocket. The sister of his wife (the daughter of a London Alderman) gained an interview with King James and pleaded eloquently for her sister’s husband. This has some effect as lawyers were sent to interview some of Monmouth’s chief officers, particularly lord gray, who was sentenced to death. All spoke in Creswicke’s favour but the King was so prejudiced against all those who had had anything to do with Monmouth that it was a long while before the joyful news came to Hanham that Creswicke was to be pardoned.

Just after his second Christmas in prison Creswicke returned home to much rejoicing and local festivities, for the Creswickes were generous to a fault. Evidently King James did not now doubt the loyalty of his subject at Hanham for on the 25^th august the king visited Creswicke at Hanham Court. It was a great honour to receive a visit from the King but it also meant a great expense, for he travelled with a large company of lords and ladies. To adequately entertain them, sir Francis had to borrow large sums and further mortgage his house and lands.

Francis Creswicke, although a generous man, was also very hot-tempered and quick to avenge a fancied wrong. For some reason he went to Ireland in 1704 and while there fought with the Attorney General, Robert Rockford Esq. The fight took place in St. Andrew’s church in Dublin and Rockford received a severe wound. This, and the fact that the fight took place in a church on a Sunday gained sir Francis another nine years in prison.

He came back to Hanham once again, old and poor. His creditors began to press him and at last he was put into prison for dept.  After many years he was released and spent the rest of his days quietly at home until he died on 18^th January 1732 aged 89 and was buried at Bitton Church.

Sir Francis Creswicke was by far the most interesting of the Creswickes but it is a pity that during his life he reduced his estate from a rich one to a poor one and because he spent between 20 and 30 years in prison caused much misery to himself, his family and the many people who depended upon Hanham Abbots for their living.

Sir Francis was succeeded by one of his sons but he only lived twelve years after his father. There is not much known about him except that he impoverished the family by going to law with Sir Michael Newton about the rights of the lord of the manor in Kingswood Chase.

Subsequently another Henry Francis occupied the Court and he was imprisoned for dept in 1785. Fortunately for him he had married the daughter of Squire Dickenson of Queen Charlton, near Keynsham and she paid the dept to secure his release. This couple had two sons and one daughter. The oldest son was named Henry after his father and the younger called Humphrey. Henry died in 1853 and Humphrey became the last of the Hanham Creswickes in 1856. Henry had earlier sold his share of the estates to Humphrey who was neither a careful nor good business man.

Things went from bad to worse. Several times the Creswickes were evicted, but with the help of friends and tenants were re-instated, often after many fierce battles between them and the bailiffs who, it was said, were sometimes caught and thrown in the nearby pond.

When Humphrey Creswicke died the Court passed out of their possession for ever and Thomas White, Esq., of Bedford Row paid off the mortgage and took possession of the house, lands and most of the old furniture. In 1869, when Squire White died, the estate was sold to a Mr Hancock, a Bath Spirit Merchant.

Humphrey Creswicke’s brother Henry had a son named Henry. This Creswicke never lived in Hanham but took his family to Canada where they did well. It is thought that at one time another member of the Creswicke family was a Solicitor in Chippenham.

The next owner of the Court was Pierre John-de-Carteret who lived there until 1919. The present owner and occupier is frank H. Stevens Esq., and he is doing all he can to restore the buildings. It is a pity that so much of the contents of the Court went under the auctioneers’ hammer when Squire White died and that so many relics of the colourful Creswickes should have been separated from the Court where they belonged.