[Transcriber's note: (~denotes smallcaps, for headings, used in the html file~)] Ealing and its Vicinity D F E Sykes, LL. B. THE purpose of this brochure is not an ambitious one. It does not aspire to rank in antiquarian or topographical interest with the work of Mr. Falkener; its modest claim is to tell briefly and in simple words such facts connected with the parish of Ealing and its neighbourhood as may be reasonably supposed to possess an interest for the ordinary resident and for the stranger whom he invites within his gates. It is intended to be a great deal less than an erudite tome of ancient lore, and a little more than the descriptive prefix usually contained in a local Guide or Handbook. The village of Ealing lies on the northern and southern sides of the Uxbridge Road, and is distant about seven miles west from where once stood Tyburn Turnpike. The Parish of Ealing is not mentioned in Domesday Book but was probably then comprised within the manor of Fulham. It is within the Hundred of Ossulstone and the County of Middlesex and in the Diocese of London. Its eastern boundaries are, Chiswick, Acton and Twyford; its western, New Brentford, Hanwell, and Greenford; its northern the river Brent, Harrow and Perivale; its southern, the Thames. Ancient records present many different modes of spelling the name; Yelling, Yealinge, Zellin and the one now in vogue. The significance of the word does not appear, but it may be connected with Zea-ling Bea-meadow. The parish reaches three and a half miles from north to south, and two miles one furlong from east to west, and has an acreage of about 3,800 acres. It is divided for parochial purposes into the Upper or Ealing side, and the Lower or Brentford side, but the ratepayers constitute at present one vestry. The manor of Ealing has belonged from time immemorial to the See of London, and the custom of copyhold prevails therein, the tenants’ holding being evidenced by copy of the Court rolls. The origin of this tenure is very obscure, but it would seem to have originated with the villeins or tenants in villeinage, who composed most of the agricultural population of England for some centuries after the Norman Conquest, through the commutation of base services into specific rents in money or money’s worth. The predecessors of our copyholders were mere tenants at the will of the Lord of the manor, but the practice of the Lord’s recognising the claims of the near kindred of a deceased tenant to succeed him in his holding gradually ripened into a custom which was ultimately established by a decision of the Judges in Edward IV’s time, who held that a tenant by copyhold might have an action of trespass against the Lord for dispossession. From this time copyholders have been in effect freeholders, the difference consisting in the method of alienation, and in some instances in the obligation to sundry fines, and in the method of descent on intestacy.