One of the Saxon Chroniclers is reported to have said, the survey, taken by order of William the Conqueror, was so accurate “that not a hide or yardland, not an ox, cow, or hog, was omitted in the census.” And although we may not be able to believe that the Conqueror’s scrutiny was thus minute, yet the Dom Boc, or Domesday Book, has been always looked upon as a document worthy of much confidence. The inquisitors were appointed to enquire “Upon the oath of the sheriffs, the lords of each manor, the presbyters of every church, the reves of every hundred, the bailiffs and six villains of every village, into the name of the place, who held it in the time of King Edward, who was the present possessor, how many hides in the manor, &c., &c.” {5a} If these directions were carried out, and faithfully entered, we should expect to find some account in this document of the Abbey possessions in Paddington, if any such existed at the time this survey was taken. But Mr. Saunders is perfectly correct in stating that no mention is made either of this place, or of Westbourn, or Knightsbridge, in the Domesday Book. In the hundred of Osulvestane (Ossulston) the King held twelve acres and a half of land, worth five shillings, claimed by no one. He had also in this hundred “thirty cottagers who pay fourteen shillings and ten pence and one half-penny a year;” and two other cottagers belonging to Holburne paying “twenty-pence a year to the King’s Sheriff.” {5b} “In the village where the Church of St. Peter is situated,” there were at the time of this survey, forty-one cottagers who paid forty shillings to the Convent for their gardens. And the land in and around the village of Westminster which belonged to the Abbey amounted in all to thirteen hides and a half; valued at eight pounds per annum. The whole in King Edward’s time twelve pounds. {5c} The manor of Kensington answered for ten hides; and was held by Aubrey de Ver. Lilestone answered for five hides; Tybourn for five hides; Willesden for fifteen, with pannage for five hundred hogs; and Chelsea {5d} and Hampstead are duly accounted for. But Paddington in Middlesex is not named. A manor of “Padendene” existed at this time, and is mentioned in the survey, but it was situated in the county of Surrey; and singularly enough was shortly after held by the same family—the De Veres—who held Kensington, and who afterwards, also, held Tybourn.