It is true that this notable Knight and most noble mason, {33a} sold another estate “for 400 marc steryling,” which is described as “lying and being in Tybourne, Lilliston, Westbourn, Charying, and Eye.” But this was sold “to Thomas Hobson, gent.;” and called “the maner of Maribone,” which is said to have consisted of “all the meses, lands, tenements, &c. which were of Robert Styllington, late Bishop of Bath and Welles and of Thomas Styllyngton cosyn and Heyre of the same Robert.” {33b} It may also be true that Sir William, afterwards Lord Sands, or Sandys, succeeded by the aid of William, Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Chancellor of England, the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, “and divers other friends of both parties,” in dividing the great property left by Sir Reginald Bray, between himself and the nephews to whom Sir Reginald had left it in his will. And it is perfectly true that Sir William, who “had married the daughter and heir of Sir Reginald’s elder brother John,” came into the possession of property in Paddington by this Star Chamber decision. But this was through his having had the manor of Chelsea as a portion of his share of Sir Reginald’s lands assigned to him. Neither this “honest country lord,” this “merry gamester,” whom Shakspeare has immortalized, nor the “Gent.” whose choice is still a proverb, held land in Paddington long. Both Lord Sands, and Thomas Hobson, exchanged their lands and manors of Chelsea, and Marylebone, with Henry the eighth, for other manors and lands; and the manor of Chelsea with those lands in Paddington which had belonged to Lord Sands were settled on Katherine, the widowed queen of the many-wived murderous monarch. The beautiful, and perfectly preserved, illuminated indenture, in the Lansdowne collection, B.M., to which I have just now refered, more fully than the Countess’s will, which was printed in 1780, with other royal wills of an anterior date, details the donor’s desires with respect to the property she had disposed of. How far those desires and wishes have been carried out, others can tell much better than I can. No expense or pains appears to have been spared by the munificent donor to make her bequest in accordance with the law, and so far as her knowledge went, useful to posterity. Her Cambridge and Oxford professors are still known. But where is her grant to the poor? Are her professors still paid the stipends she fixed for them; or do the readers and the preachers divide between them the large estates she left? Where is that large estate in Paddington, which was valued in her grandson’s reign at the exact amount she left to the poor?