In Easter Term 1284, Milisent de Montalt (Sister and Coheiress of George de Cantilupe) was impleading William de Hodnet for the service of a knight's fee in Hodnet. The Feodaries of 1284-5 say that "William de Hodnet holds the Manor of Hodnet with its members, viz. Longford, Peplow, Parva Bowlas, Preston (on the Wealdmoors), Horton, and half the vill of Lawley of the King in capite, the Jurors knew not by what service. The said William had at Hodnet rights of Market, Fair, and Free Warren, under a Charter of King Henry III., and he used those franchises". Here I should observe that when the Hodnets are said to be Tenants-in-capite, the expression is not inconsistent with their holding mediately under the Lords of Montgomery. The Jurisdiction and tenure of these Lords was much qualified by a direct control, exercised by the Crown over the Castle and Honour of Montgomery.
In January 1287, William de Hodnet was appointed one of the Conservators of the Peace in Shropshire. On a Jury-list of 1290, though he takes precedence of Sir Ralph de Sandford, knight, he is not styled a knight himself. At the Assizes of October 1292 he appears as a Knight, and as a Juror in causes of Grand Assize. His exercise of Free Warren in Hodnet was made matter of presentment on this occasion. His tenure of Hodnet, by service of Seneschalcy, was also set forth, and the Manor valued at £40 per annum. Peplow and Preston were treated as members of Hodnet, and the alienations therein specified, as I have elsewhere stated them. The Tenants in one instance affirmed that "their Ancestors had held under the Ancestors of William de Hodnet from a time to which memory did not reach, viz. from the time when Roger de Beleme (sic), Earl of Salop, enfeoffed William de Hodnet's ancestors in the aforesaid Serjeantry". This bold assertion was corroborated by a Jury, but circumstantially it cannot have been true.
William de Hodnet was, immediately after this, questioned under Quo Waranto for holding a Market, exercising Free Warren, and assizing bread and beer in Hodnet. The two former privileges he justified by a Charter of Henry III. The third privilege, be pleaded, was involved in the first. So he was dismissed sine die. In 1294, he was appointed Assessor and Collector of the tax of the Tenth in Shropshire. In 1297, as holding lands or rents of £20 annual value, and upwards, he was summoned to perform military service with horses, arms, etc., in parts beyond the Seas. The Muster was to be at London on July 7, but on Oct. 23 William de Hodnet was appointed a Commissioner of Array for Salop and Staffordshire. In May 1298, he was returned to the Parliament of York as a Knight of the Shire, his Manucaptors being Roger Caber and Stephen Parker, both of Hodnet. In the same month, and for the same day (May 25), he had military summons to be at York, for service against the Scots.
On Nov. 12, 1300, a Fine was levied between William de Hodnet (Plaintiff) and William, son of Laurence de Ludlow and his wife Matilda (Deforciants) of the Manor of Hodnet. William de Hodnet first acknowledged the Manor to be the right of Matilda, by gift of himself to her and her husband. They in turn granted it to William de Hodnet for his life, to hold under themselves and the heirs of Matilda at a rose-rent, and by performance of all capital services. Remainder to William de Ludlow and Matilda his wife, and the heirs of Matilda. A similar settlement of William de Hodnet's other estates followed in July 1301. I have already set it forth, and need only to explain here that the places called Wylbeleye Corbet and Wolureton were Weobley and Woolerton near Hodnet, but that they were not members of Hodnet, and that, whatever William de Hodnet held in either, must have been held as a Feoffee. In the case of Woolerton he doubtless held under Shrewsbury Abbey.
In 1301 William de Hodnet had again a military summons to serve against the Scots; but in this and the following year his actual employment seems rather to have been as an Assessor and Collector of Taxes in his native County. The time of his death is uncertain, but he was succeeded in all his estates by his son-in-law, William de Ludlow. 1
Research Notes: